Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Petals Engineers Pvt Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Goa

2016 (3) TMI 570 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Computation of assessable value - exclusion/ inclusion of installation/erection/commissioning charges at site of the customer - Held that:- The appellant have raised two invoices one is towards sale of the machines and second for integration and commissioning of the machines supplied to the customers. Integration and commissioning is an independent activity which can be performed either by the appellant or any out side agency, charges recovered towards integration and commissioning charges is no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion and commissioning is over valued therefore the amount charged for intimation and commissioning has to be accepted for the activity carried out by the appellant at site of the customers. This Tribunal in various judgments time and again held that installation/erection/commissioning charges at site of the customer is not includible in the assessable value. SEE Commissioner of C. Ex. Chandigarh Vs. Khosla Machines Pvt. Ltd [2014 (3) TMI 375 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], ) Erricsson India Pvt. Ltd Vs. C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

L) For the Petitioner : Shri. M.R. Nadkarni, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent(A.R.) ORDER PER : RAMESH NAIR This appeal is directed against Order-in- Appeal No. GOA/CEX/SNS/04/2005 dtd. 12/9/2005 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise(Appeals), Panaji, Goa wherein appeal filed by the appellant was rejected. 2. The fact of the case is that appellant are engaged in the manufacture of Vival Washing Machines(8422.80), Ampoules Washing Machines(842 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

de their commercial invoice No. 20 dated 27/3/2002 they have recovered ₹ 3,80,000/- from M/s. Pastaur Institute of India, Coonoor as integration and commissioning. A show cause notice was issued proposing demand of ₹ 1,56,800/- interest and penalty which was adjudicated and demand of duty and equal penalty and interest was confirmed. Aggrieved by the said order appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the appeal, therefore appellant is before us. 3. Shri. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the installation, erection at site of the customers it become immovable property and therefore it is not excisable, any amount recovered towards non excisable activity can not be formed part of the assessable value of the excisable machines cleared from the factory. 4. Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Ld. Superintendent(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterating the findings of the impugned order submits that as per the definition of transaction value in Section 4, it is clear that any amount to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Engineers Pvt Ltd [2009(14) S.T.R. 305(Tri. Ahmd.)] (b) Commr. of Cus. & C.Ex. Aurangabad Vs. Roofit Industries Ltd[2015(319) ELT 221(S.C.)] 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 6. We find that the appellant have raised two invoices one is towards sale of the machines and second for integration and commissioning of the machines supplied to the customers. Integration and commissioning is an independent activity which can be performed either by the appellant or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sale value of the machines, but it is also not the case that value charged for the integration and commissioning is over valued therefore the amount charged for intimation and commissioning has to be accepted for the activity carried out by the appellant at site of the customers. This Tribunal in the following judgments time and again held that installation/erection/commissioning charges at site of the customer is not includible in the assessable value. Some of the judgments are reproduced below .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the value of the goods manufactured by them. The said charges are subsequent to the clearance of the goods and has no nexus with the assessable value of the goods. We are of the view the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly allowed the respondents appeal and no infirmity can be found therein. We accordingly reject the Revenues appeal. (b) Erricsson India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I[2013(294) ELT 599(Tri. Del.)] 3. We find favour with the above submission of the learned advo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pellant has already discharged their service tax liability in respect of the said consideration, in which case the same cannot be taxed to Central Excise duty. 4. We, in view of the foregoing discussions, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant. (c) Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik Vs. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd[2013(293) ELT319(Tri. Mumbai)] 4. We find that the respondent entered into two different contracts, one is for supply of DG sets .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

LT 269(Tri. Mumbai)] 8. In the light of the above decision and the facts of the case involved, we find that the demand of the Department for inclusion of travelling expenses from the factory to the customers site for erection and installation work cannot form the part of the transaction value under Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 and, therefore, excise duty demand on such value is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, we allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any. (e) Commissioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

filed this Appeal on the ground that outward handling charges and charges for proper placement of transformer on the plinth are includible in the assessable/transaction value as per the provisions of Section 4(1)(a) of Central Excise Act. We find that in the sale contract under the column price mentioned that extra charges for placement of transformer on the plinth is ₹ 15, 000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) per unit whenever applicable meaning thereby that these charges are not conditi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Machines (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara, 2005 (181) E.L.T. 63 (Tri.-Mumbai), has held that the goods to be assessed in the form in which cleared from the factory and subsequent activities of fabrication, erection and technical supervision charges at site will not form a part of the assessable value of the goods cleared from the factory. To the similar effect are the other decisions relied upon by the appellant. Tribunal in case of M/s. Majestic Auto Ltd. v. CCE, 2003 (160) E.L.T. 541 (Tri.-Del.), has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lectricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. Kanpur[ 2008(230) ELT 187(Tri. Del)] 6.We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. The charges recovered by the appellant from their customers are for post clearance activities. Admittedly, it was based on separate contracts with their customers for supervision of erection and commissioning of machinery. In the case cited above by the learned Advocate the issue relating to inclusion of installation and commissioning charges cam .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er the installation and commissioning charges are eligible to excise duty? This controversy stands concluded by two decisions of this Court. 12. In coming to this conclusion, reliance was placed on an earlier decision of this Court in Quality Steel Tubes (P) Ltd., v. Collector of Central Excise, 1995 (75) E.L.T. 17 (S.C.) = (1995) 2 SCC 372, in which also it was held that erection and installation charges cannot be included in the assessable value of the goods. It was held thus:- erection and in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version