Post-removal erection and commissioning charges were excluded from excise assessable value because they lacked nexus with manufacture.

Erection and commissioning charges collected separately for machinery installed at the customer's premises were treated as post-removal expenses and not part of the assessable value for central excise. The machinery had already been cleared on payment of duty, and the charges were incurred after removal at the customer's site. The assessee's position that such charges were optional and depended on customer preference was not rebutted. Because the charges had no nexus with manufacture or marketability, they were held excludible from assessable value, and the demand was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether erection and commissioning charges collected separately for machinery installed at the customer's premises are includible in the assessable value for central excise purposes.

Analysis: The machinery was cleared on payment of duty and the erection and commissioning charges were incurred after removal at the customer's site. The assessee's claim that such charges were optional and depended on customer preference was not rebutted. Charges of this nature are post-removal expenses and have no nexus with manufacture or marketability of the goods.

Conclusion: The erection and commissioning charges were not includible in the assessable value. The appeal was allowed and the demand was set aside.

---