2007 (7) TMI 133

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....judicating Commissioner has held that the amounts reflected in the debit notes on which Excise Duty has not been paid has to be included in the invoice price as the sum of the two would represent the value of the impugned goods under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Valuation Rules, 1975. The ld. Advocate claims that the amount reflected in the debit note represents abnormal expenditure which is not liable to be included in the assessable value. In our view, the said contention has been rightly rejected by the Adjudicating Commissioner. We also note that the remand order of the Tribunal did not require this issue to be reopened in the remand proceedings as the same was confined to the other three issues. As such, the demand in respect of this issue sta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssioner is correct in including the entire value of the designs and drawings in such cases while arriving at assessable value of the impugned goods. Consequently, the demand of Rs. 3,65,300/- is confirmed. 5.The third issue relates to addition of notional interest on advances. We find that the Department has not shown as to how the prices were influenced by the advances taken and there is no comparison to bring out any evidence that the same goods have been sold to the buyers at higher price who have not given advances. As such, the case law cited by the ld. Advocate relating to Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III v. I.S.P.L. Industries Ltd. - 2003 (154) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) is squarely applicable to the facts of this case. The said de....