9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A.R) for respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This is an appeal filed against order-in-original No.38/Commr. M-II dtd. 20.02.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacturer of Motor Vehicles classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading No. 87039090 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Alle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sold by them being claimed as deduction. It is his contention that after 1.9.2003 the said Pre Delivery Inspection and after sales service expenses incurred by the dealers, were not claimed as deduction by the appellant and appropriate duty has been discharged on the same by including the said cost in the transaction value. Therefore, the value of Pre Delivery Inspection and after sales service ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by the dealers on the motor vehicles purchased from the appellant be included in the value of the motor vehicles while determining the excise duty on the same. It is the contention of the appellant that after 1.3.2003, they have not claimed deduction on account of Pre Delivery Inspection charges and After Sales Service charges incurred by their dealers in providing such services from the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2007, 1763-1764/2009, 2204/2013, 2205/2013, 957-959/2014, 7854-7865/2014 and 7444/2008 are dismissed. On the other hand, Larger Bench view in Maruti Suzuki does not lay down the law correctly and is, therefore, overruled and the appeals filed by the assessees, i.e. C.A. Nos. 7007/2011, 7550/2011 and 3768-3769/2011 are allowed." 7. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order is de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
