TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DIA), it was held by this Court that after sale of goods had taken place at the factory gate, therefore, the place of removal was not the premises of the buyer - It was also held that in that event, the amount claimed by way of transportation charge cannot be considered for determining the value of the goods. - 4399 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 19-4-2011 - Dr. Mukundakam Sharma and Anil R. Dave, JJ. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the excisable goods were delivered by the assessee at the buyer s premises but the closer scrutiny of the records would indicate that the assessee had arranged for the transportation of goods to be delivered at the buyer s premises and the transportation charge was paid by the assessee who was subsequently reimbursed by the buyers. It is also indicated from the records that the place of removal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the value of the goods. 3. In our considered opinion, identical are the facts of this case with that of the said decision in Escorts JCB Ltd. (supra). There is yet another decision of this Court which is rendered in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida v. Accurate Meters Limited - 2009 (6) SCC 52 = 2009 (235) E.L.T. 581 (S.C.) wherein this Court approved the decisions rendered by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
