2013 (6) TMI 449

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es agreed between the two parties for sale at factory gate. Safety is a matter of utmost importance while transporting explosives to buyer's premises and explosives cannot be transported by ordinary means of transport. So the appellants have specially designed vehicles, licensed by the Explosives Department, for transportation of the goods and they deliver the goods at places where the buyer needs it. Depending of the place where supply is to be made as per buyer's order supplies are made either from the factory or from magazines at selected places where the Appellants store such goods. They were paying excise duty on invoices issued under Rule 11 of the CER, 2002 showing the price agreed for sale and paying excise duty. However they were i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on Rule 5 of the Valuation Rules provides that cost of transportation from the place of removal to the place of delivery is not to be subjected to duty. The Appellants also rely on the following decisions in this matter, - (a) Escorts JCB Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 2002 (146) E.L.T. 31 (S.C.). (b) Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 2009 (233) E.L.T. 344 (Tri.). 5. The Counsel also submitted that the department seems to rely on Board's Circular No. 634/34/2002-CX., dated 1-7-2002 to argue that the cost of return freight of the containers has to be included in assessable value. But the Board has accepted the above cited decisions and withdrawn the circular dated 1-7-2002 by Circular No. 923/13/2010-CX., dated 19-5-2010. 6. The ld. AR fo....