2005 (8) TMI 130

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r No. 36/2000-A. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and partly rejected it. 2.It is against that part of the appeal which was decided against the Revenue and in favour of assessee, the Revenue has filed this reference application calling for the questions proposed for answer by this Court. One of the question that arose before the Tribunal was "whether the fitting of the rubber/plastic ring could be included in the assessable value of the pipes and tubes manufactured by the assessee ?" This issue was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal by recording the following finding : "Cost of Rubber/Plastic Rings - The end of the pipe at which the socket was not fitted was covere....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....additional testing/inspection charges for the tests/inspections conducted by the Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals at the request of the specific customers were not includible in the assessable value when cost of such additional testing/inspecting was being borne by the customers. The Supreme Court dismissed the Civil Appeal No. 2465 of 1992 filed by the CCE against the aforesaid Tribunal's decision as reported in the Court Room Highlights at page A-51 in 1992 (62) E.L.T. Thus, we hold that the cost of galvanisation and that of the sockets and the service charges were includible in the value of the pipes and tubes, while the cost of rubber/plastic rings and the inspection charges were not includible in the assessable value of....