TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 55
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry, G. Prahlad and P. Venkata Prasad, Advocates/CA for the appellants/Respondent assessee S/Shri T.V.S.R. Prasad, Smt. D. Sree Nagesh, Binabakshi, Diwakar Rao and Gautam Mukherjee/ARs for the Respondent. ORDER 1. All these appeals are on the same issue and hence are being disposed of together. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue which falls for consideration in these appeals is whether the freight incurred for transporting the goods to the buyers' premises by the assessee when the goods are sold for delivery at the buyers premises is includable in the assessable value under section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944, or otherwise. It is the case of the department that once the goods are sold at the buyers' premises, al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to Section 4 read with Valuation Rules. 4. Therefore, until the ownership of the goods gets transferred to the buyer, the removal is not complete and all expenses upto the place of removal have to be included. If the ownership gets transferred only at the buyer's premises the sale of goods takes place at their premises as per the Sale of Goods Act and all expenses up to that point including the freight from the factory or the depot to the buyers' premises is includable in the assessable value. 5. Of the above appeals, appeal No. E/30188/2018 is filed by the Revenue against the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in which he held that the freight from the factory to the buyer's premises is not includable in the assessable value....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nly to the manufacturer and not to the buyer of excisable goods. The depot, or the premises of a consignment agent of the manufacturer are obviously places which are referable only to the manufacturer. Even the expression "any other place or premises" refers only to a manufacturer's place or premises because such place or premises is stated to be where excisable goods "are to be sold". These are the key words of the sub-section. The place or premises from where excisable goods are to be sold can only be the manufacturer's premises or premises referable to the manufacturer. If we are to accept the contention of the revenue, then these words will have to be substituted by the words "have been sold" which would then possibly have reference to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n'ble Apex Court in the case of Roofit Industries Limited it was held that the buyers premises can be a place of removal. In fact, they can never be so because the expression in Section 4(4)(b)(iii) is a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any place or premises from where the excisable goods " are to be sold" after their clearance from the factory from where such goods are removed. Once it reaches the buyers' premises, they "are not to be sold" but they have already been sold. Further, there is no further scope for removal at the buyer's premises because the goods have already been removed. A plain reading of the expression also shows that the depot, premises of a consignment agent, etc. are places which belong to the seller and not t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'ble Apex Court and has reached finality. It is true that the case of Ispat Industries Limited (supra) was in the context of unamended Section 4 which did not have clause (iii) of Section 4(4)(b) which said " A depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or other premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory from where such goods are removed". The case of Roofit Industries Limited pertain to the amended Section 4. In the case of Roofit Industries Limited, Hon'ble Apex Court held that freight up to the buyers premises is includable in the assessable value where the sale is for delivery at the buyer's premises because that is where the ownership changes in terms of Sale of Goods Ac....