1997 (5) TMI 257

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., for the Appellant. Shri R.K. Talajia, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. -  Duty amounting to Rs. 83.27 lacs has been demanded and penalty totalling Rs. 83.44 lacs imposed on the applicant. 2. Advocate for the applicant says that these amounts have been adjudged as due on the ground that the charges incurred on erection, commissioning and test....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been no suppression, as alleged, to the fact that the charges were incurred because by virtue of the Tribunal decision referred to earlier it was the applicant's view that these charges were not includible in the assessable value and therefore need not be furnished to the department. 3. The Departmental Representative contends that the excisability of the product is not in doubt. The goods....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thheld from the department the fact that it incurred expenses on account of testing and installation. He contends that the Patna High Court's decision supports, which was later to the Tribunal's decision, the view that erection and installation, commissioning charges should form part of the assessable value. 4. The Tribunal decision in Braithwaite & Company Ltd. specifically held that erec....