TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (5) TMI 377
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appellant. Shri S.C. Pushkarna, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. - The appellant is a manufacturer of Sheet Metal Components, which are liable to Central Excise duty on ad valorem basis. The tooling required for manufacture of components was either received free from the components buyers or the components buyers paid for them separately. The appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case of suppression of facts, situation specifically mentioned in the Proviso. 2. In the present appeal, the appellant contend that the tooling cost was not required to be included in the assessable value of sheet metal components, since the price charged for the metal components was the only consideration for the appellant. It is also pointed out that since the appellant would have been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... They have pointed out that only in 1996, vide CBEC Circular dated 23-1-1996, it was clarified that cost of pattern etc. is to be included in the assessable value on a proportionate basis. It is also pointed out that there was no suppression inasmuch as receipts towards cost of tooling were reflected in the books of account and balance sheet of the appellant. 3. As against this, the conten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....made by both sides. In the present case, the duty paying documents did not disclose the fact of separate recoveries towards tooling charges. The fact of free supply or separate recovery of charges for tooling was also not disclosed to Central Excise authorities through any other communication during the relevant period. In these facts and circumstances, the lower authorities were justified in hold....