Central excise duty – equalized freight case decision by CESTAT

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI

E/S/243/2009 and E/347/2009

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 39/2009 dated 24.3.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy)

For approval and signature:

Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President
Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

M/s. TANSI Engineering Works                Appellant

     Vs.

CCE, Trichy                                Respondent

Appearance

Ms. Kamashikanth, Advocate, for the Appellants
Ms. Indira Sisual, JDR for the Respondent

CORAM

Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President
Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member

      Date of Hearing:  20.06.2011
      Date of Decision: 20.06.2011

Stay Order No. _____________
Final Order No.  ____________

Per Jyoti Balasundaram 

    For reasons recorded below, we waived predeposit of duty of Rs.13,839/- confirmed against the assessees together with interest and penalty of equal amount and proceeded to dispose of the appeal itself with the consent of both sides, as the issue stands covered by the decisions of the apex Court which have been followed by the Tribunal.
2.    The issue in dispute in this case is as to whether excess freight is required to be included in the assessable value of goods manufactured by the assessees the assessees received freight from the operators under a pre-determined ratio based on the weight of the final product as per the contract. According to the Revenue there was a difference between the freight shown in the transporters invoice and that shown in the sales invoice. It is the Revenues case that excess freight is required to be included in the assessable value. However, we note that this issue is no longer res integra as it stands covered in favour of the assessees by the apex Courts decision in Baroda Electric Meters Vs. CCE 1997 (94) ELT 13 (SC) and the recent decision of the apex Court in CCE Vs. M/s. Accurate Meters Ltd. 2009-TIOL-31-SC. The ratio of the above decisions is squarely applicable to the present case which is on equalized freight. Following the above decisions, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief if any due to the appellants in accordance with law.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)

(Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy)           (Jyoti Balasundaram)
        Technical Member                      Vice President

Rex

??

??

??

??

3