9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 1430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actory before the goods were dispatched to the customers indicating the name and address of the customers in the invoice-cum-delivery challans for which CST was paid in all cases. Invoices also contained a condition stating that "our responsibility ceases the moment consignment is handed over to the carrier, claims for delay, damaged or loss of the goods in transit should be made by the buyers against the carriers. Please receive the goods as above and return the endorsed freight voucher." The department was of the opinion that since the goods were sold on FOR destination basis, the place of removal shifts to the buyers' premises and therefore, the cost of transportation of cement to the buyers' premises has to be included in the assessable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excluded, save and except in a case where the factory is not the place of removal. 24. It will thus be seen that, in law, it is clear that for the period from 28-9-1996 up to 1-7-2000, the place of removal has reference only to places from which goods are to be sold by the manufacturer, and has no reference to the place of delivery which may be either the buyer's premises or such other premises as the buyer may direct the manufacturer to send his goods. As a matter of law therefore, the Commissioner's order and Revenue's argument based on that order that freight charges must be included as the sale in the present facts took place at the buyer's premises is incorrect. Further, for the period 1-7-2000 to 31-3-2003 there will be no exte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to the seller and it cannot be the buyer's premises. Once the goods reach the buyer's premises, there is nothing to be removed or sold and the sale is already complete. Therefore place of removal has to be seller's premises. For the purpose of valuation under Section 4, the value has to be the transaction value at which the goods are sold by the assessee for delivery at the time and place of removal. Therefore, there is no scope for charging excise duty on the cost of transportation from the seller's premises to the buyers premises. Respectively following the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd. (supra) we hold that the demands are not sustainable and impugned orders need to be set aside and we do so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
