2009 (11) TMI 887

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (T) and Shri P.K. Das, Member (J) Shri K.S. Venkatagiri and S. Panchanathan, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri V.V. Hariharan, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides in respect of 15 appeals which involve a common issue. The appellants have been awarded turnkey project by Tamilnadu Water & Drainage Board (TWAD Board) for laying pipelines for supply of water. Under the project, 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 documents are used as a basis for submitting quotations by the appellants, no separate price is quoted by the appellants for the impugned pipes. The Department, under the impugned order, has discarded the assessable value calculated by the appellants applying CAS-4 and has adopted the price given in the tender invitation document by TWAD Board suitably adjusting the same depending on the total c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....use of the pipes in a turnkey project by the buyer, was akin to captive consumption. 6. Shri V.V. Hariharan, the learned Jt. CDR cites the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.K. Kotecha v. CCE, Aurangabad - 2005 (179) E.L.T. 261 (S.C.) under which the method of comparable prices were ordered to be adopted as the basis of valuation. 7. After hearing both sides and per....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... turnkey project undertaken by them and are maintaining these pipes for one year and the project cost covers both the cost of pipes as well as the cost of laying the pipeline and maintenance of the same, the valuation of the impugned pipes has to be done under Rule 11 adopting the cost construction method prescribed under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules. We also note that, in this cas....