TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nditure incurred by the manufacturer is not the additional consideration and that, if an additional amount in addition to the transaction value is received from the buyer by the manufacturer then such amount is treated as additional consideration and only such amount qualifies for demand of differential Central Excise duty - amount need not be included in the assessable value - appeal allowed - de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period from April, 2008 to March, 2015 appellants spent on transportation of goods manufactured by them from factory to the sales depot. It appeared to Revenue that said value should be added to the assessable value and therefore they were issued with five show cause notices dated 25/07/2012, 03/03/2014, 13/10/2014, 10/04/2015 and 12/06/2015 demanding differential Central Excise duty of ₹ 4, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7/2012 wherein it is stated that expenditure incurred on transportation of excisable goods from factory to the sales depot was not added in the assessable value. He has further submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the Final Order issued by this Tribunal in the case of Eveready Industries India Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida reported at 2015 (315) E.L.T. 288 (Tri.-Del.). 4. Heard the Learned A.R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of differential Central Excise duty. We also find that the issue is no more res-integra in view of the Final Order of this Tribunal in above stated case. We therefore, hold that the demands raised in above stated show cause notices amounting to ₹ 4,31,40,066/- are not sustainable. Therefore, we set aside all impugned orders and allow the appeals. The appellants shall be entitled for conseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
