Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 55 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - inclusion of freight incurred for transporting the goods to the buyers’ premises by the assessee when the goods are sold for delivery at the buyers premises - section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 - place of removal - HELD THAT:- The place of removal is before the goods are sold, not when the goods have been sold. Further, there is no removal of the goods at the buyer’s premises because the place of removal requires the goods to be removed from that place. Thirdly, the description of the ‘place of removal’ are the depot, consignment agent etc. which can only be referred to the seller and not to the buyer. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD VERSUS M/S ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD. [2015 (4) TMI 857 - SUPREME COURT] has categorically held that under no circumstances can the buyer’s premises be the place of removal. It also made it clear that this fact was not brought to the attention of the Court when the earlier orders were passed - it is now well settled that the buyers’ premises can never be the place of removal, therefore the freight from the factory/depot/consignment agent up to the buyers’ premises cannot be included in the assessable value, even if the goods are sold or delivered at the buyer’s premises. The settled legal position is in favor of the appellants and against Revenue and the demands are unsustainable on merits and need to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|