Erection and commissioning charges after removal of goods were excluded from assessable value for duty.

Erection and commissioning charges incurred after clearance of goods were not includible in assessable value for duty because they arose after removal and were outside the manufacturing activity. The Tribunal held the departmental reliance on Supreme Court decisions to be inapplicable on the facts, as the charges related to post-removal installation and commissioning. Accordingly, the charges were not liable to duty inclusion and the departmental appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether erection and commissioning charges, incurred after removal of the goods, were includible in the assessable value for duty purposes.

Analysis: The Tribunal found that the charges were incurred after clearance of the goods and were not part of the manufacturing activity. The departmental reliance on the cited Supreme Court decisions was held to be inapplicable on the facts of the case, since the activity in question related to installation and commissioning after removal of the goods.

Conclusion: Erection and commissioning charges were not liable to duty inclusion, and the departmental appeal failed.

---