2006 (1) TMI 292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant. Shri K.S. Reddy, SDR, for the Revenue. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - The revenue has proceeded against the appellant to demand duty of Rs 45,52,845/- on the allegation that 50% of the advertising cost borne by the dealer is required to be added in the assessable value. The appellants contend that they have already added 50% of the advertising cost borne by them to the as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly, 2002. Learned counsel submits that this clarification in no way changes the legal position laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Philips India Ltd., and the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra (supra). Learned SDR defends the order based on the findings recorded by the Commissioner. 2. On a careful consideration, we notice that the appellants have already added 50% of....