Separate units, optional peripherals and post-manufacturing installation charges were excluded from assessable value in this excise commentary.

Separate manufacturing units with distinct premises and workforce were treated as independent for small scale exemption, so their clearances could not be clubbed absent a legal basis. Optional peripherals supplied only in a small percentage of cases, such as a printer with a weighing machine, were not regarded as integral to the goods and their value was excluded from assessable value. Installation charges for work done outside the factory gate were treated as post-manufacturing expenses and were also excluded from assessable value.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the clearances of the two units could be clubbed for denying small scale exemption; (ii) whether the value of the printer, supplied as an optional peripheral with the weighing machine, was includible in the assessable value; (iii) whether installation charges were includible in the assessable value.

Issue (i): whether the clearances of the two units could be clubbed for denying small scale exemption.

Analysis: The adjudication order recorded that the units were separately existing, had separate manufacturing premises, separate workforce, and capital from the same source. The appeal did not dislodge these findings or show any basis for treating the two units as one.

Conclusion: The clearances could not be clubbed; the finding of separate units stood in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether the value of the printer, supplied as an optional peripheral with the weighing machine, was includible in the assessable value.

Analysis: The printer was found to be optional equipment and was supplied only in a small percentage of cases. On that basis, it was not an integral part of the weighing machine.

Conclusion: The printer value was not includible in the assessable value; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): whether installation charges were includible in the assessable value.

Analysis: The installation charges were collected for installation carried out outside the factory gate and represented post-manufacturing expenses. They were not shown to be compulsory charges to be borne as part of the manufacturing value.

Conclusion: The installation charges were not includible in the assessable value; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The duty demand was not sustained on any of the contested grounds, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Optional accessories supplied as peripherals and post-manufacturing installation charges are not part of the assessable value, and separately functioning units with distinct premises and workforce cannot be clubbed absent a legal basis.

---