1997 (12) TMI 444

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant. Shri S.V. Singh, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)]. -  The appellants manufacture machinery falling under Chapter 84 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department found that the appellants were charging commissioning and erection charges for the machines installed by them at their customer's premises through issue of separate bills/in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d therefore expenses on such activities should form a part of the assessable value. Hence he confirmed the demand. 2. Shri S.C. Bhide, the ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that erection and commissioning charges were incurred after the removal of the machines on payment of duty from the factory. This charge is not compulsory but optional. He cited the decision of the 36th Meeting o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unal held that erection and commissioning charges collected from the customers are not includible in the assessable value, especially, in a case where these charges were optional. 3. Shri S.V. Singh, the ld. D.R. contended that there are no details available to indicate that the machinery at erection site becomes immovable property. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions. ....