Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik Versus Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.

2016 (11) TMI 830 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Valuation - inclusion of dealers margin in the assessable value on the ground as per the dealers agreement, dealer is supposed to incur expenses towards advertising, publicity, marketing, after sale services etc. which are required to be done by the respondent and the dealer is compensated for such expenses which is difference in margin and not dealer price - Held that: - the issue of cost of advertising, marking, publicity incurred by the dealer from their margin cannot be included in the asses .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Dated:- 1-9-2016 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Hitesh Shah, Commr (AR) for appellant Shri S. Chandrasekhar, Dy. Manager Excise Per: M.V. Ravindran These two appeals are filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. BR(361)18/MV/2005 dated 11.02.2005 and order-in-original No. 03/CEX/2004 dated 31.01.2005. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue that falls for consideration in these appeals is regarding the inclusion of deale .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ondent and after following due process of law adjudicating authority dropped the demand cum show-cause notice on the ground that the issue is now squarely covered by the Judgement in the case of Philips India Ltd. - 1997 (91) ELT 540 (SC). 4. Learned A.R would submit that the order passed by the adjudicating authority is incorrect. He would submit that the dealers agreement says that the dealer is bound in terms of contract to undertake advertisements, sales promotion, marketing and aftersale se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CCE v. Poona Bottling Co. Ltd. - 2005 (182) ELT 23 (S.C.) and CCE v. Eicher Tractors Ltd. - 2004 (164) ELT 129 (S.C.) has held that expenses incurred by the manufacturer s buyer/dealer could be added to the sale price for determining the assessable value if the manufacturer had an enforceable legal right against such buyer/dealer; which in the case in hand is confirmed. It is his further submission that the order-in-original is a non-speaking order and needs to be set aside as the adjudicating .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version