Assessable value under central excise excludes optional bought-out items, system engineering, and installation-related charges without proof of inclusion.

Under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, only amounts shown to be integral or essential to the excisable goods, or otherwise legally part of manufacture or assessable value, can be added. Bought-out items supplied under the contract were held not includible because the record did not establish that they were essential parts of the computers and related goods, and several items appeared optional or separately supplied. System engineering charges were also excluded because the department did not prove that they related to manufacture or design of the goods. Installation, commissioning and testing charges were not includible, following the principle that post-manufacture services are outside assessable value absent a clear legal basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the value of bought-out items supplied in connection with the contract was includible in the assessable value of the computers and related goods; (ii) Whether system engineering charges formed part of the assessable value; (iii) Whether installation, commissioning and testing charges were includible in the assessable value.

Issue (i): Whether the value of bought-out items supplied in connection with the contract was includible in the assessable value of the computers and related goods.

Analysis: The items sought to be added were not shown to be integral or essential parts of the manufactured goods. The record did not identify which bought-out items were actually essential, and the material placed by the assessee indicated that several items were supplied at the buyer's premises and were optional in nature. The earlier view in the assessee's own case, which required examination of whether such items were essential or optional and whether the main equipment could be supplied without them, was not followed in the adjudication order.

Conclusion: The value of the bought-out items was not includible in the assessable value and the addition on this count could not be sustained, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether system engineering charges formed part of the assessable value.

Analysis: The department did not establish by cogent evidence that the system engineering charges related to the manufacture or design of the goods themselves. The assessee's case was that the charges related to system design at the buyer's office, and that contention was not effectively refuted. Inclusion of such charges could not be based merely on the absence of further explanation from the assessee.

Conclusion: System engineering charges were not includible in the assessable value, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether installation, commissioning and testing charges were includible in the assessable value.

Analysis: The Supreme Court had already held that installation of computers and training of personnel are not includible in assessable value. Following that position, the charges for installation, commissioning and testing could not be treated as part of the value of the goods.

Conclusion: Installation, commissioning and testing charges were not includible in the assessable value, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded on the substantive valuation issues, while the Revenue's challenge failed; the common result was that the assessee's appeals were allowed and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: For valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, only amounts representing integral or essential components of the excisable goods, or charges legally shown to form part of manufacture or assessable value, can be added; optional or separately supplied items and post-manufacture services such as installation and commissioning are not includible absent clear legal and factual foundation.

---