TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvance remains with the appellant for a maximum period of two weeks and depending on the stock held by the appellant at a particular point of time delivery of the goods may be affected earlier than 15 days. The Department issued notice to the assessee alleging that the interest payable on the advance received from the dealers should be included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured. Notice alleged that by taking such advance the assessee had avoided borrowing from banks on an equivalent amount on which it would have paid the interest the advances were equivalent to bank loan. The notice, issued in 1997 for the goods cleared between July, 1992 and 1995 invoked the extended period in the proviso to Section 11A and also proposed im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .T. 449 (S.C.) = 1995 (6) RLT 519 (S.C.) and VST Industries Ltd. Ors v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad - 1998 (97) E.L.T. 395 (S.C.) = 1998 (24) RLT 221 (S.C). 4. The Departmental Representative adopts the reasoning of the Commissioner saying that, but for this advance the assesssee would have had to take a loan from a bank or commercial institution for which it had to pay interest which it would have recovered from the customers by including in the assessable value. Therefore, the interest payable on these advances ought to be included in the assessable value. He says the decisions relied upon by the appellant are distinguishable on facts since in those cases unlike the present one there was no uniform practice of taking advanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e an advance. It cannot be therefore be shown that the advances affects the price. There is no evidence to show that there is a direct relationship between the price charged to a customer and the party in which advance is taken. If the Departmental Representative s contentions were to be accepted, it would follow that the price would vary from customer to customer depending upon the period of time for which the advance was taken. In addition, the contention of the appellant that in all except 5% cases delivery has been made within a couple of days of the advance being taken is significant. Normally no one would borrow from a bank for a day or two. The demand for duty is unsustainable and therefore penalty and interest should not been ordere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
