Separately recovered freight does not enter assessable value merely because it exceeds actual transport cost.

Freight recovered separately from the price of excisable goods did not form part of assessable value merely because the amount collected exceeded the actual transportation cost. The goods were delivered at work sites, freight was charged in addition to the value of the goods, and only the excess over actual freight was disputed. Applying Supreme Court principles on separately recovered freight, the excess freight could not be added to assessable value, and the Revenue's appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether freight recovered in excess of the actual transportation cost could be included in the assessable value of the excisable goods.

Analysis: The buyers were mostly public health departments, the goods were delivered at work sites, and freight was charged separately in addition to the value of the goods. The dispute related only to the difference between freight claimed and the actual freight paid. The issue was covered by the principles laid down by the Supreme Court that freight charges, where separately recovered, do not form part of the assessable value merely because the amount collected exceeded the actual transportation expense.

Conclusion: The excess freight could not be included in the assessable value, and the Revenue's appeal failed.

---