TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not under obligation to undertake the inspection and bear the expenses thereof. As regards the inspection it is a contract between the inspection agency and the customer and the payment transactions invariably made between both of them. Therefore, in few cases, whatever payment was borne by the respondent, for the inspection, the same was collected from the customer as reimbursements which cannot form part of transaction value as the subject amount is not paid or payable on account of sale of goods. Reliance placed in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur v. Bhaskar Ispat Pvt. Ltd. [2004 (3) TMI 102 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], where it was held that cost of additional testing conducted at customer s request and borne by the cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue is before us. 3. Shri Ajay Kumar, Jt. Commissioner (AR), appearing on behalf of Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal. He submits that the goods manufactured by the respondents cannot be sold without the inspection as required by the customers. Therefore, the goods become marketable only after inspection. He submits that as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, all the elements which are required to be carried out before clearance of the goods should form part and parcel of the transaction value. He refers to the judgment relied upon in the grounds of appeal in the case of Hindustan Gas Industries Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Baroda 2001 (123) ELT 481 (Tri.-Mumbai). 4. On the other hand, Shri Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been clearly spelt out in the contract. As per Section 4, any amount which is paid or payable on behalf of the goods will form the transaction value. In the present case, as per the contract, the respondent is not under obligation to undertake the inspection and bear the expenses thereof. As regards the inspection it is a contract between the inspection agency and the customer and the payment transactions invariably made between both of them. Therefore, in few cases, whatever payment was borne by the respondent, for the inspection, the same was collected from the customer as reimbursements which cannot form part of transaction value as the subject amount is not paid or payable on account of sale of goods. In this regard, learned Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udable in the assessable value of the goods. In the case of Bhaskar Industrial Development. Ltd (supra) this Tribunal has held that inspection charges in respect of inspection conducted by third party at the instance of buyer and borne by the buyer not includable to determine the assessable value. 7. Similarly, by relying upon the Larger Bench decision, the Tribunal in the case of Sulzer Pumps India Ltd (supra) it was held that cost of additional testing at customer s request not includable in the assessable value. Similar view was taken by the Tribunal in the case of Tirupati Structurals Pvt Ltd. (supra), Johnson Pumps (India) Ltd. (supra) and A. Infrastructure Ltd. (supra). 8. As per the facts and being the legal issues settled in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
