https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331832 The Tribunal upheld the order-in-appeal, ruling that charges for erection, installation, commissioning, and pre-delivery inspection should not be included in the assessable value for central excise duty calculation. They determined that the charges were contractual extras and not mandatory for the manufacturer. Citing relevant case law and Supreme Court judgments, the Tribunal clarified that such charges are not excisable and need not be factored into the duty calculation. The Revenue's appeal was rejected, and the respondent's cross objection was disposed of accordingly. en-us Thu, 26 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jan 2017 16:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331832 The Tribunal upheld the order-in-appeal, ruling that charges for erection, installation, commissioning, and pre-delivery inspection should not be included in the assessable value for central excise duty calculation. They determined that the charges were contractual extras and not mandatory for the manufacturer. Citing relevant case law and Supreme Court judgments, the Tribunal clarified that such charges are not excisable and need not be factored into the duty calculation. The Revenue's appeal was rejected, and the respondent's cross objection was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331832