COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE versus M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD.

Citation: [2015] 15 S.C.R. 22 · Decided: 15-12-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 15 S.C.R. 22 
A 
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE 
B 
v. 
M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 5155-5156 of 2007) 
DECEMBER 15, 2015 
[A. K. SIKRI AND R. F. NARIMAN, JJ.] 
Central Excise Act, 1944-s.4 (as amended by Finance 
c Act, 2000) - Assessment under - Assessable value -
Whether would include 'Pre-delivery Inspection Charges' 
(PD/) and 'After Sale Service charges' (ASS) - Held: The 
expenses incurred towards such services are solely borne 
by the dealer and such services are not provided on behalf 
D of the manufacturer- The amount which was reimbursed by 
the assessee-manufacturer to their dealers pertaining to free 
services was being claimed as abatement in relation to the 
normal transaction value - Therefore, PD/ charges and free 
ASS charges would not be included in the assessable value 
E u/s.4 for the purpose of paying excise duty- Centra/Excise 
Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 
2000. 
Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi 2010 
F 
(257) ELT 226 - overruled. 
G 
H 
Tata Motors Ltd. v. Union of India 2012 (286) ELT 
161 (Born.) -
approved. 
Union of India vs. Ingersoll Rand (India) Ltd. 2000 
(120) ELT 290 (S.C.); Maruti Udyog Limited v. 
CCE, Delhi-1112004 (170) ELT 245 (Tri-Del); Ford 
Motor India Ltd. v. Secretary of State AIR 1938 PC 
15 = 1978 (2) ELT (J 265) (PC); A.K. Roy v. Valtas 
Ltd. 1973 (2) SCR 1089: (1973) 3 sec 503; Ml 
22 
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE v. 
23 
M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD. 
s. Philips India Ltd. v. CCE, Pune 1997 (91) ELT 
A 
540; Commissionerv. Te/co Ltd. 2001 (130) ELT 
A260 (S.C.); Union of India v. Bombay Tyre 
International 1984 (1) SCR 347 : (1984) 1 SCC 
467; Government of India and Ors. v. MRF Ltd. 
and Ors.1995 (3) SCR 1143: (1995) 4 sec 349; 
B 
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. Collector of 
Central Excise 1998 (103) ELT 606; Mis. 
Hindustan Motors Ltd. 1998 (101) ELT 198 (T); 
Mis. Escorts Tractors Ltd. 1999 (078) ECR 342 
c 
(T) - referred to. 
Case Law Reference 
2004 (170) ELT 245 (Tri-Del) 
referred to 
Para 2 
2010 (257) ELT 226 
overruled 
Para 3 
D 
AIR 1938 PC 15 = 
1978 (2) ELT (J 265) (PC) 
referred to 
Para 5 
1973 (2) SCR 1089 
referred to 
Para 5 
1997 (91) ELT 540 
referred to 
Para6 
E 
2001 (130) ELT A260 (S.C.) 
referred to 
Para 7 
1984 (1) SCR 347 
referred to 
Para 9 
1995 (3) SCR 1143 
referred to 
Para9 
F 
1998 (103) ELT 606 
referred to 
Para 9 
1999 (111) ELT A126 
referred to 
Para 9 
1998 (101) ELT 198 (T) 
referred to 
Para 13 
1999 (078) ECR 342 (T) 
referred to 
Para 13 
G 
2000 (120) ELT 290 (S.C.) 
referred to 
Para 13 
2012 (286) ELT 161 (Bom.) 
referred to 
Para 15 
H 
24 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 15 S.C.R. 
A 
CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 
5155-5156 of 2007 etc. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 03.11.2006 of the 
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, 
B Bangalore in Final Order No. 1860 & 1861 of 2006 in Appeal 
No. E/63 & 65 of 2006. 
WITH 
C.A. Nos.1763-1764of2009, 7007, 7550&3768-3769 
C of 2011, 
2204 & 2205 of 2013, 957-959 & 7854-7865 of 2014 
K. Radhakrishnan, Subramonium Prasad, Sr.Advs., Ms. 
Nisha Bagchi, Ms. B. Sunita Rao, T. C. Sharma, Ms. Pooja 
Sharma, B. Krishna Prasad, V. Lakshmikumaran, M. P. 
D Devanath, Ms. L. Charanaya, HemantBajaj,Anandh K.,Aditya 
Bhattacharya, T. D. Satish, Shreekant N. Terdal, Vineet Sinha, 
Jay Kishor Singh, Utkarsh Srivastava, Arvind Kumar Sharma, 
Ms. Nandini Gore, Abhishek Roy, Ms. Khushboo Bari, Ms. 
E Trishala Kulkarni, Ms. Neha Khandelwal, Ms. Manik 
Karanjawala, Ms. Devina Sehgal, M/s. Karanjawala & Co., 
Advs., for the appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
F 
A. K. SIKRI, J. The question of law which arises for 
consideration in all these appeals is identical, which is the 
following one; 
Whether the pre-delivery inspection charges (for short 
'PDI') and after sales service charges (for short 'ASS') are to 
G be included in the assessable value? 
2. For the sake of convenience, however, we take note 
of the facts from the record of Civil Appeal Nos. 5155-5156/ 
2007 wherein Mis. TVS Motors Company Ltd. (hereinafter 
H referred to as the 'assessee') is the respondent. The assessee 
COMMISSIONEROFCENTRALEXCISE, MYSORE v. 
25 
M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD. [A. K. SIKRI, J.] 
is holding central excise registration for the manufacturing and A 
clearing two wheeled motor vehicles classified under Chapter 
Sub-Heading 8711.20 and 8711.10 of the Central Exci
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.