TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices, it is evident that the freight and transportation are separately indicated and excise duty is collected on the basic value excluding the freight and insurance. The matter is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case CCE, Aurangabad Vs. Roofit Industries [2015 (4) TMI 857 - SUPREME COURT], where it has been held that once the sale of the goods to the buyer is at the factory gate, the expenses which were incurred after removal of the goods from the factory gate are not to be included in the value of the goods for the purpose of excise duty. Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/1014/2011-(DB) - F/76140/2012 - Dated:- 4-7-2017 - (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President And Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... department has not raised demand on the entire amount of freight and only on the excess amount paid indicating that the department has accepted that the sale is concluded at the factory gate. He also contended that the Rule 5 of the Valuation Rules does not support the case of the department as the place of removal is the factory gate. He relied on the following case law: (1) CC CE, Aurangabad Vs. Roofit Industries Ltd.-2015 (319) ELT 221 (SC). (2) Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. Vs. CCE-1997 (94) ELT 13 (SC) (3) CCE, Chandigarh Vs. PRS Rolling Mills Pvt.Ltd.-2012 (281) ELT 560 (Tri.-Del.) (4) Insulators Electricals Co. Vs. CCE, Bhopal-2014 (313) ELT 223 (Tri.-Del.). 3. Learned AR contended that as per Rule 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Co. Vs. CCE, Bhopal (supra) wherein this Tribunal has held as follows: 7. On bare reading of Section 4(1)(a) it is clear the cases where the goods are sold by the assessee for delivery at the time of place of removal and the assessee and the buyer are not related then the price is the sole consideration for the sale and such value shall be the transaction value for the purpose of excise duty. In the instant case also, there is nothing on record to suggest that the appellant or his customer or anyone of them are related parties. It is undisputed that the goods in question was sold at the factory gate, therefore, the factory gate itself is the place of removal by the customer. As such, for the purpose of the excise duty the transa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Industries - 2015 (319) ELT 221 (SC) it has been held that once the sale of the goods to the buyer is at the factory gate, the expenses which were incurred after removal of the goods from the factory gate are not to be included in the value of the goods for the purpose of excise duty. 7. We also note that there is no stay by higher judicial forum against the judgment in the case of Icomm Tele Limited Vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 2010 (251) ELT 103 (Tri.-Bang.) which also covers this issue. 8. Following the above judgments, we find that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable and the same is set aside. The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. (Order pronounced in the court on 04/07/2017) - - TaxTMI - TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
