TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1038X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s included in assessable value - there is no basis that the balance amount was not included in the assessable value –the assessee had already included the charges towards PDI and ASS in the assessable value - the amount of money value of any additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee in Rule 6 of Valuation Rules, 2000, make it clear that the amount should be received by the assessee - there is no material available that the assessee had collected any additional consideration – Decided against Revenue. - E/538/2004 - Final Order No. 40196/2013 - Dated:- 2-5-2013 - Shri P.K. Das and Shri Mathew John, JJ. For the Appellant: Ms. Indira Sisupal, Asst. Commr. (AR) For the Respondent: Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the discount at the hands of the dealer indirectly. In this context, she particularly drew the attention of the Bench of grounds of appeal insofar as on comparison of clearances effected during 2002-03 and the corresponding charges towards ASS, PDI VIF @ Rs.440/per vehicle with the trial balance of 2002-03, it shows that the actual reimbursement should have been Rs.1,16,85,080/whereas the assessee have reimbursed and accounted for only Rs.90,84,145.10. It, therefore, appears that a portion of the expenditure towards the said charges is borne by the dealer on behalf of the manufacturer. Thus an amount of Rs.26,00,935/has escaped assessment towards value for the period 2002-03 on which the duly liability works out to Rs.4,24,620/(BED Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal authority. Rule 6 of Valuation Rules provides where the excisable goods are sold in the circumstances specified in Section 4(1)(a) of the Act except the circumstances where the price is not sole consideration for sale, the value of such goods shall be deemed to be the aggregate of such transaction value and the amount of money value of any additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee. In the instant case, there is no allegation that the respondent had collected any additional consideration from the buyer. We find, on this issue, the Commissioner (Appeals) had given a detailed finding as under:- I have gone through the facts of the case and the submissions made. I find that there is a funda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants. Hence this amount already stands included for payment of duty. The same cannot be added once again. 5. In the present appeal, according to the Revenue, the actual reimbursement should have been Rs.1.16 crores and the respondent had reimbursed or paid to the dealer only Rs.90.84 lakhs and duty was demanded on the differential amount. Hence it appears that the amount of Rs.90.84 lakhs was included in assessable value. Thus, there is no basis that the balance amount was not included in the assessable value. In the case of Maruti Suzuki (supra), as relied upon by the learned AR, the issue had arisen for consideration as to whether the charges towards PDI and ASS are to be included in the assessable value. In the present case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
