2006 (2) TMI 388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Appellant. Shri K.S. Bhatt, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - Consequent to CESTAT, Bangalore's Final Order No. 1417/2004, dated 23-8-2004, the Commissioner has passed the de novo Order No. 16/2005, dated 27-6-2005. 2. The issue relates to the inclusion of transportation charges in the assessable value of the Cylinders manufactured and cleare....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....voice, lorry receipt, etc. to establish beyond any doubt that the goods were removed direct from the factory and were consigned direct to the factory nominated by the consigner. (ii)    The relevant documents were shown to the adjudicating authority. (iii)   The Apex Court, in Escorts JCB Ltd. - 2002 (146) E.L.T. 31 (S.C.), clearly states that delivery of the goods t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of delivery is the consignee's nominee and not the factory gate of the appellant. It has been clearly stated in the statement of the Appellant's Manager even at the Investigation stage that the transportation of the Cylinders to various destinations was arranged as required by the consignees vide paras 4 & 7 of the Show Cause Notice. Therefore this is not a case of sale of goods for delivery at ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eiterated the OIO. 6. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The Commissioner, after going through certain provisions of the Purchase order given by M/s. IOC to the appellant, comes to the conclusion that the case falls under Section 4(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This approach, we are afraid, is not correct. As rightly contended by the learned Consultant, the in....