TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (12) TMI 368
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... C.P. Rao, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - The appellant is manufacturer of electric fans. It sells fans to wholesale dealer from twenty depots located in different parts of the country. It has no sale at the factory for sale from 16 of these depots the appellant had one price. This price was higher than the sales made from the remaining four depots which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... first proposition upon the decisions of the Tribunal in Gora Mal Hari Ram Ltd. v. C.C.E., Delhi - 1994 (69) E.L.T. 269 and in Travancore Cements Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1994 (71) E.L.T. 498. He relies for the latter proposal upon decision of Gujarat High Court in Gujarat State Fertilisers Company v. U.O.I. - 1980 (61) E.L.T. 397 and the Bombay High Court decision in Music India Ltd. v. U.O.I. - 1986 (25....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the appellant has not show the existence of specific factors and the precise influence that these factors have upon the determination of the price, so as to sustain a conclusion that the difference in price is due to commercial considerations. He points out that the term "geographical consideration" is so vague to be meaningless. He therefore, opposes the appeal. 5. There cannot be any dis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i vary in different places would itself justify difference in assessable value given the fact that these taxes cannot form part of the assessable value was not explained. Again we are unable to appreciate what is meant by "geographical considerations" which would justify reduction in prices. It is not possible to appreciate a difference in geography between Ahmedabad & Kanpur, and Delhi & Jaipur. ....