TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 792X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so find that the transit breakage is covered under the sound delivery charges and the same were in nature of insurance to breakage of the goods - sound delivery charges recovered by the appellants were not to be added to the assessable value, the bifurcation of the same into freight, insurance and transit breakage, by the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/581 and 656/2005 - Final Order Nos. 328-329/2012-EX(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 27-2-2012 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa and Shri Mathew John, JJ. Shri B.L. Narsimhan and Shankey Agrawal, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri N. Pathak, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Both the appeals, one filed by the appellants and other by the Revenue are being dispo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... September, 1996 to June, 2001. The said SCN culminated into confirmation of demand of duty of Rs. 15,55,649/- along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalties. The said confirmation was made by the adjudicating authority by relying upon the Tribunal s decisions in the case of Escort (JCB) Ltd. - Final Order No. 1222/1999-A, dated 24-8-1999 [2000 (118) E.L.T. 650 (Tri.)] as also on the Tribunal s decision in the case of Prabhat Zarda Factory Ltd. reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 191. 4. The said order of the original adjudicating authority was appealed against by the appellants before Commissioner (Appeals). It was brought to the notice of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the Tribunal s decisions relied upon by the lower authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in 2010 (253) E.L.T. 610 (Tri.-Ahmd.), and it was held that charges for transit insurance were not includible in the assessable value. He submits that the appeal filed by the Revenue against the said decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gujarat Borosil Ltd. stands rejected by the Hon ble Supreme Court vide their order dated 19-7-2010 [2012 (284) E.L.T. A163 (S.C.)]. As such he submits that the issue stands decided right upto Hon ble Supreme Court and should be followed. He also clarifies that Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in the case of Surya Roshini Ltd. relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) was also considered by the Tribunal in the subsequent case of Gujarat Borosil Ltd. which stands confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
