Hercules Hoists Ltd. Vs. Cce and C

Hercules Hoists Ltd. vs Cce and C

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 17, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25070

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/25070
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T Gowri, G Srinivasan
Decided On: Aug 17, 2001
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hercules Hoists Ltd.

Respondent

Cce and C

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(100)LC557Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. hercules hoists ltd. sold some of the hoists manufactured by it to batliboi & co. ltd. in terms of the agreement between these parties, batliboi & co. ltd. was to incur half of the expenses that the manufacturer spent in advertising the goods. the question for consideration in this appeal is whether that part of the expenses incurred by batliboi & co. ltd. is to be included in the assessable value of the hoists. in the order impugned in the appeal, the commissioner (appeals) has confirmed the finding of the assistant collector that these charges are to be included.philips india ltd. v. cce is that the expenses incurred by a dealer of excisable goods benefited both him and the manufacturer equally and should not form part of the assessable value of those goods. the ratio is squarely applicable to the facts of this case.3. the appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside, with consequential relief.

Full Judgment

1. Hercules Hoists Ltd. sold some of the hoists manufactured by it to Batliboi & Co. Ltd. In terms of the agreement between these parties, Batliboi & Co. Ltd. was to incur half of the expenses that the manufacturer spent in advertising the goods. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether that part of the expenses incurred by Batliboi & Co. Ltd. is to be included in the assessable value of the hoists. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Collector that these charges are to be included.Philips India Ltd. v. CCE is that the expenses incurred by a dealer of excisable goods benefited both him and the manufacturer equally and should not form part of the assessable value of those goods. The ratio is squarely applicable to the facts of this case.

3. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside, with consequential relief.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Hercules Hoists Ltd. vs Cce and C Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge S T Gowri, G Srinivasan