Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (4) TMI 655

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and handling charges of Rs. 20,37,289/- and Rs. 44,01,058/- respectively @ 0.5% on assessable value, from their customers for the period from 2007-08 to 2010-11 and April 2011 to February 2012 respectively and had not included the above said charges in the assessable value of excisable goods cleared on payment of duty. Therefore the appellant were issued two show cause notices dated 30.03.2012 and 22.03.2012 proposing recovery of Central Excise Duty on freight and handling charges recovered from their customers as they were forming part of assessable value of excisable goods cleared by them from their factory premises. In adjudication, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty under the proviso to Section 11A(1) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f excise duty of these recoveries without any proof, evidence or basis that the appellant has depressed the real value of the excisable goods and a part of the transaction value was actually recovered in guise of freight and handling charges, is unsustainable. 2.1 He further submits that the facts of this case show that show cause notice were issued to appellant and it was also clear from the show cause notices that excise duty was proposed to be recovered on this recovery only with reference to section 4 of the Act and the explanation thereunder defining the term "transaction value" but no evidence at all was brought on record even at the time of issuing the show cause notice to suggest that 0.5% of the value of the goods recovered by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ORS LTD. VS. CCE, BANAGLORE -2007(217)ELT 104 (TRI. CHENNAI) TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTORS LTD. VS. COMMR. - 2016(331) ELT A137(SC) STOVE INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. CCE, AHD-I- 2016(344)ELT 1035 (TRI.- AHMD.) CCE, CHENNAI -I VS. KALPANA LAMPS AND COMPONENT -2017(7)GSTL 100 (TIR- CHENNAI ) LAMINA SUSPENSION PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. VS. CCE, BANGALORE - 2018(17)GSTL 296(TRI. BANG.) FINAL ORDER NO. A/10836/2019 DATED 29.04.2019. 03. On the other hand, Shri Vijay G. Iyengar, learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings in the impugned order. 04. We have carefully considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. The issue required to be decided in this matter is that whether the amo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessable. CESTAT, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai in the case of CCE, Nagpur v. Ram Krishna Electrical Pvt. Ltd.2011 (272) E.L.T. 149 (Tribunal) (supra) has also held as follows : - "5.1 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Accurate Meters Ltd. 2009 (235) E.L.T. 581 (S.C.) considered a similar situation wherein the goods were supplied by the assessee to the State Electricity Boards and two separate contracts were entered into, one for sale of meters and another for transportation and transit insurance thereof. As per the terms of the contract, the assessee was bound to transport the goods from the factory-gate to the place of State Electricity Boards at the rates specified in the tender. In the said case t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsportation from the place of removal up to the place of delivery of such goods is not includible in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not chargeable to Central Excise duty under Section 3 of the Act. In the instant case, the appellant has claimed the handling charges of 1% of the value as part of the transportation cost. Therefore, it is not includible in the assessable value. 6. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. 4.3 In the above judgments it is held that amount charged as freight & handling charges and separately shown in the invoices cannot be included in the assessable value u/s 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore being the same facts and issue .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates