https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116333 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that expenses borne by agents for advertisement should not be included in the assessable value. The decision aligned with the precedent set in Philips India Ltd. v. CCE, emphasizing that the shared expenses should be deducted from the assessable value. The Tribunal distinguished the case from CCE v. Bajaj Tempo Ltd., affirming that the expenses borne by agents were not to be subject to duty, ultimately upholding the principles established in Philips India Ltd. v. CCE. en-us Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:52:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116333 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that expenses borne by agents for advertisement should not be included in the assessable value. The decision aligned with the precedent set in Philips India Ltd. v. CCE, emphasizing that the shared expenses should be deducted from the assessable value. The Tribunal distinguished the case from CCE v. Bajaj Tempo Ltd., affirming that the expenses borne by agents were not to be subject to duty, ultimately upholding the principles established in Philips India Ltd. v. CCE. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116333