Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Mahendra Nissan Allwyn Ltd. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. this is an application filed by the department seeking stay of the impugned order of collector (appeals), hyderabad dated 31-1-1994. shri singh, the learned sdr submitted that the issue arising in this appeal is as to whether the value of the tool kits would be includible in the assessable value of the chassis or not. it was urged that in a similar issue the division bench of the patna high court in telco v. union of india reported in 1994 (72) e.l.t. 525 while taking a view that the tools kit supplied with motor vehicle chassis are not eligible for modvat credit under rule 57 of the central excises rules, 1944 has also taken note of the fact that the value of such tool kits is included in the assessable value of the chassis. shri singh further submitted that the said decision of the patna high court was challenged before the supreme court and the supreme court on 16-8-1994 dismissed the special leave petition no. 124/74/94 [see 1994 (73) e.l.t. a129] filed by the tata engineering & locomotive co. ltd. upholding the decision of the division bench of patna high court. the learned sdr submitted that the prima facie the impugned order holding the value of the tool kits non-includible in the assessable value, is not correct and prays for stay of the impugned order pending appeal.2. shri sankaram, the learned counsel submitted that the supreme court in dismissing the slp of telco has not gone into the merit of the case and the includibility of the cost of tool kits in the assessable value of chassis not referred to and, therefore, the stay application may be dismissed.3. we have considered the submissions made before us. in our view having regard to the decision of division bench of the patna high court cited supra, which was also confirmed by the dismissal of slp by the supreme court, prima facie, the view taken in the impugned order is not acceptable in law. in this view of the matter we accept the plea of the learned sdr and stay in operation of order of collector (appeals).4. shri sankaram, the learned counsel submitted that the early date may be fixed since the issue involved is one of the question of law. the learned sdr has no objection.5. the petitioner may take up an application for an early hearing before the proper bench for fixing an early date for hearing of the case.

Judgment:
1. This is an application filed by the Department seeking stay of the impugned order of Collector (Appeals), Hyderabad dated 31-1-1994. Shri Singh, the learned SDR submitted that the issue arising in this appeal is as to whether the value of the tool kits would be includible in the assessable value of the chassis or not. It was urged that in a similar issue the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in TELCO v. Union of India reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 525 while taking a view that the tools kit supplied with motor vehicle chassis are not eligible for Modvat Credit under Rule 57 of the Central Excises Rules, 1944 has also taken note of the fact that the value of such tool kits is included in the assessable value of the chassis. Shri Singh further submitted that the said decision of the Patna High Court was challenged before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court on 16-8-1994 dismissed the Special Leave Petition No. 124/74/94 [see 1994 (73) E.L.T. A129] filed by the Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. upholding the decision of the Division Bench of Patna High Court. The learned SDR submitted that the prima facie the impugned order holding the value of the tool kits non-includible in the assessable value, is not correct and prays for stay of the impugned order pending appeal.

2. Shri Sankaram, the learned counsel submitted that the Supreme Court in dismissing the SLP of TELCO has not gone into the merit of the case and the includibility of the cost of tool kits in the assessable value of chassis not referred to and, therefore, the stay application may be dismissed.

3. We have considered the submissions made before us. In our view having regard to the decision of Division Bench of the Patna High Court cited supra, which was also confirmed by the dismissal of SLP by the Supreme Court, prima facie, the view taken in the impugned order is not acceptable in law. In this view of the matter we accept the plea of the learned SDR and stay in operation of order of Collector (Appeals).

4. Shri Sankaram, the learned counsel submitted that the early date may be fixed since the issue involved is one of the question of law. The learned SDR has no objection.

5. The Petitioner may take up an application for an early hearing before the proper Bench for fixing an early date for hearing of the case.