1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal upholds exclusion of differential value of lubricants & rubber rings from duty calculation</h1> The Tribunal upheld the decision to exclude the differential value of sale price and purchase price of lubricants and rubber rings from the assessable ... Valuation Issues:1. Inclusion of duty paid on the differential value of sale price and purchase price of lubricants and rubber rings in the assessable value.2. Applicability of earlier Tribunal decision in the current case.Detailed Analysis:1. The appeal was filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, challenging the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. The issue revolved around whether the duty paid by M/s. Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. on the purchase price of lubricants and rubber rings should be included in the assessable value. The appellant argued that since the separate sale price of rubber rings and lubricants was not identifiable, the duty on the differential value should be included. On the other hand, the respondent contended that a previous Tribunal decision in their favor supported their position, emphasizing that the cost of rubber rings and lubricants should be excluded from the assessable value.2. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both sides and examined the facts of the case. It was noted that the current matter was similar to a previous case involving the same respondent, where a specific decision had been made regarding the inclusion of the profit made from selling bought-out items in the assessable value. The Tribunal referenced the earlier order and reiterated that the cost of rubber rings and lubricants should be excluded from the assessable value, especially when the profit earned by the appellants through trading in these items did not impact the value of the main product. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the previous decision and dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue.In conclusion, the Tribunal relied on the precedent set by the earlier decision and maintained that the profit from selling rubber rings and lubricants should not be added to the assessable value of the main product. The dismissal of the appeal affirmed the exclusion of the differential value of sale price and purchase price of lubricants and rubber rings from the duty calculation, in line with the principles established in the previous Tribunal ruling.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
