TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 168X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s N.S. Shetty. No expenses are incurred by the appellants. As no flow back is alleged or evidenced, proposal to include the charges incurred by the buyer in respect of gypsum sold by the appellants to the contractor is by no stretch of imagination legally tenable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/580 to 584 & 247/2010 - Final Order No. A/87155-87160/2018 - Dated:- 24-8-2018 - Hon ble Mr. S.K.Mohanty, Member ( Judicial ) And Hon ble Mr. P. Anjani Kumar, Member ( Technical ) Shri D.B. Shroff, Advocate for appellant Shri A.B. Kulgod, Asst. Commr ( AR ) for respondent ORDER Per : P. Anjani Kumar The issue involved in this case relates to the inclusion of loading and levelling cost i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty on the appellants as well as the contractor. On an appeal made by the appellant, this Tribunal in the case of appellants reported at 2007 (214) ELT 313, have set aside the penalty and demands holding that the reliance on the aforesaid Hon ble Supreme Court judgement was mis-placed as the issue in that case involved had a question of deduction of loading charges incurred within the factory from the price of goods whereas in the present case the facts were different; there is no doubt that the appellants incurred the expenses for the above purpose and these expenses were taken into account while selling the gypsum to the buyers. The contractor has undertaken the work in terms of contract between him and the buyers of the appellant, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y applicable; it is manifestly specious attempt to distinguish the case in view of the case of Indian Oxygen Ltd (supra). The Tribunal in the case of Supreme Petro Chem Ltd. (supra) discussed the issue of inclusion of such loading charges and held that the matter to be no longer Res Integra. In the case of Indian Oxygen Ltd (supra) the issue dealt was recovery of the loading charges by the assessee and request for deduction of the same in the value. In the present case, no amount has been recovered either directly or indirectly by the appellants other than the value of gypsum sold to the contractor i.e. M/s. N.S. Shetty. Therefore, the learned Counsel submitted that the issue being squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in their o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
