9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Zone - I which has upheld the order of the original authority confirming demand of Rs. 43,054/- and Rs. 7,214/- respectively as duty of central excise on excess freight of Rs. 2,69,090/- that had, admittedly, been recovered from customers and on the excess amount under various heads recovered from customers by issue of debit notes totaling Rs. 45,090/- besides imposing other penalties. 2. We have heard Learned Counsel for appellants and Learned Authorised Representative. 3. The issue of duty liability on excess freight recovered from customers has been settled by the Tribunal in Mercedes Benz India Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - I [2010 (260) ELT 149 (Tri-Mumbai)] wherein it has been held that '6. We have perused the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not think that the proposal to include the excess freight in the assessable value is corollary to exclusion of the actual cost of transportation from the assessable value. It has been argued that the excess freight collected by the appellant from their dealers is an additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the latter to the former and hence should be included in the assessable value of the goods under Rule 6. The term "additional consideration" appears to be referable to the additional amount referred to in the definition of "transaction value" given under Section 4(3)(d) of the Act. This definition indicates that, in addition to the amount charged as price of the excisable goods, any amount that the buyer is liable to p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s amount collected by the assessee from their dealers stands determined vide Baroda Electric Meters (supra) and therefore, in our considered view, the Revenue is precluded in the present case from contending that such amount represents additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from buyer to the seller. We are also of the view that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to the nature of the excess freight would not have been different, had their lordships considered the case for any period after 1-7-2000. The reason is that the crucial question is one of fact rather than of law. The question of fact as to the nature of the excess freight stands determined for all times by the Apex Court and accordingly, we hold t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
