Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 848 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - place of removal and place of delivery - Short payment of Central Excise Duty - respondent was selling the final product to BSNL on contract basis under purchase orders for delivering the goods at destination, but the Respondent discharged duty liability only on the value of goods at factory gate without including the expenses incurred from factory gate upto the destination - period involved is from April, 2014 to October, 2015. Held that:- The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that though the contract was on ‘free on receipt’ basis, but the amount of freight or the rate of freight was separately mentioned in the contracts and the invoices were issued when the goods left the factory premises. The Commissioner (Appeals) also observed that the amount of freight, sales tax etc. were charged separately and ‘time of removal’ was also mentioned to be when the goods left the factory premises. The Commissioner (Appeals) also noticed that the sale of goods were effected on ex-factory basis on payment of sales tax by the assessee itself and invoices were prepared at the factory directly in the name of customers at the time the goods left the factory and the freight amount was separately shown in the invoice. The factual position that emerges in the present case is similar to that of the contract before the Supreme Court in Ispat Industries Ltd.[2015 (10) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT], it has to be held that the place of removal of goods was the factory gate, though the place of delivery may be buyer’s premises. This Tribunal in Shardha Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. vs CCE, Jodhpur, [2018 (8) TMI 732 – CESTAT New Delhi], after placing reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Ispat Industries Ltd., also observed that the cost of transportation from the place of removal upto the place of delivery of excisable goods is excluded from the computation of excise duty provided it is charged to the buyers and separately shown in the invoices. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|