Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the value of bullet-proofing carried out by an independent job worker outside the factory could be included in the assessable value of the base vehicle for central excise duty.
Analysis: The base vehicle was cleared from the manufacturer's factory on payment of duty and the bullet-proofing process was undertaken subsequently by an independent job worker. The governing valuation principle was that excise duty is to be assessed on the goods as cleared from the factory at the place of removal, and where the goods undergo a further process outside the factory which does not amount to manufacture, the cost of such post-clearance processing cannot be added to the assessable value. The Tribunal applied the earlier view already taken in the appellant's own case and treated the Board's circular and the statutory valuation scheme as supporting the same result.
Conclusion: The bullet-proofing charges were not includible in the assessable value, and the demand and penalty could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: For excisable goods cleared from a factory, post-clearance value addition carried out by an independent job worker at another premises, when it does not amount to manufacture, cannot be added to the assessable value under the central excise valuation scheme.