1997 (11) TMI 158

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order per : K. Sankararaman, Member (T)]. - Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of excisable product, had filed price list dated 5-9-1988 in Part II in respect of certain goods fabricated by them for supply to their customers. The same was approved by the Assistant Collector and respondent had cleared the goods paying duty in accordance with such ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rance. We have accordingly heard Shri Sanjay Srivastava, learned DR and proceed to dispose of the appeal. 3. The main thrust in the appeal which was referred to by the learned DR in his argument is that the Collector (Appeals) erred in holding that the testing charges on account of third party's inspection at customers' cost is not includible in the assessable value. It is further stated t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te as soon as it was fabricated had been wrongly accepted by the Collector (Appeals) since the inspection of the tank was vital from the point of view of safety and quality and hence the charges incurred on account of inspection should have been included in the assessable value of the goods. 4. We have taken note of the contentions raised in the appeal. The purchase order relating to the g....