2016 (12) TMI 1518

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 Sourabh Singhania, C.A. for respondent ORDER Per Ramesh Nair The fact of the case is that the respondent M/s. Blue Star Limited engaged in the manufacture of Air Conditioners/Refrigeration equipment and supplying the same on self basis at site and undertaking the job of erection and installation of such Air Conditioners/Refrigeration. The respondent have adopted the value of the goo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Therefore all the elements incurred from the factory to the site i.e. freight charges is includible in the assessable value. The respondent have undervalued the goods by not including the freight charges in the value. He placed reliance on the judgment in the respondent s own case reported as Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-VI 2006 (200) E.L.T.108 (Tri.-Mumbai) with refer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....site on self basis. Therefore at the time of clearance of the goods there is no sale, in such case the respondent have adopted the valuation under Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 read with Rule 11 of Central Excise Valuation Rules,2000. He submits that the Revenue has not disputed the valuation method adopted by the respondent. The department has only added freight charges on the gr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....read with Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. If we go through the valuation Rules sequentially, we find that in terms of Rule 11 most appropriately Rule 8 is applicable which prescribed the valuation of cost construction method at the rate of 115% of the cost of manufacturing. The respondent have valued the goods as per Rule 8, the computation of the value on the basis of Rule 8 was not dispute....