2000 (3) TMI 425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 14-5-1986. 2. Briefly, the facts are that appellants manufacture aerated water and fill them in bottles supplied by their buyers as they neither manufacture nor own such bottles. These buyers hire bottles from M/s. Spencer & Co. Ltd. (which is a distinct Public Limited Company) than the appellants. The hire charges of Rs. 3/- per crate of 24 bottles up to 31-5-1983 and of Rs. 3.50 per crate from 1-6-1983 accrue to its owners and not appellants, though they are collected at factory gate of appellants. Security deposit of Rs. 1/- per bottle is also charged. Similarly, handling and forwarding (transport) charges of Rs. 3/- per crate are also charged by M/s. Spencer & Co. Ltd. While appellants say that these charges are as per invoice....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., costs thereof would not be includible in the Assessable value. (vi)    Regarding handling (freight) charges, he cites decision of Vijayawada Bottling Co. as in 1997 (94) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.). He also cites the case of Decora Ceramics (P) Ltd. as in 1986 (24) E.L.T. 73 (Tri.) = 1986 (9) ECR 105. (vii)   Hiring charges paid by buyer for bottles are not part of manufacturing charges. He cites B.K. Wires Manufacturing Co. v. CCE as in 1984 ECR 1913. 4. Ld. D.R. submits that the order impugned has exhaustively dealt with the issue and reiterates the same. He submits that profits generated by appellants ultimately passes on to holding company. He also reiterated the order on suppression of facts and invokabil....