Back
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
U.L. BHAT, K. SANKARARAMAN, JJ.
Collector of Central Excise, Meerut -Appellant
Versus
Friction Materials (I) Ltd. & Bramec Suri (P.) Ltd, -Respondent
Final Order No. 1924 to 1927/96-A Appeal Nos. E/282/86-A, E/CO/153/86-A E/279 to 281/86A & E/Co/150-152/86-A, 1924 of 1996, 1927 of 1996, 282 of 1986, 153 of 1986, 279 of 1986, 281 of 1986, 150 of 1986, 152 of 1986
Decided On : 19-06-1996
Per Justice U.L. Bhat: Respondent in Appeal No. E/282/86-A and common respondent in other three appeals are absent in spite of notice of hearing. We have heard Shri Vijay Singh, SDR and perused the papers.
2. Respondent in E/282/86-A is engaged in the manufacture of clutch facings, while the common respondent in other appeals is engaged in the manufacture of brake linings. To some of their customers they supplied these goods with rivets which are bought out items. Theprice list filed by them did not include the price of rivets. The Assistant Collector passed orders directing the price of rivets to be included in the assessable value of clutch facing or brakelining, as the case may be. Collector (Appeals) reversed the decision and held that the value of rivet is not to be included in the assessable value of clutch facing or brakelining as the case may be. The Collector of Central Excise being aggrieved has preferred these appeals.
3. Shri Vijay Singh, SDR submitted that rivet is an essential part of clutch face as also brakelining and the mere fact that rivets are not manufactured by manufacturer of clutch face and brakelining but are bought out items should not make any difference on the question of their includibility in the assessable value. He also submitted that while some customers may choose brakelining or clutch face with rivets, other customers may choose these goods fixed with adhesives. In this case rivets are not necessary. Rivets are essential components of the manufactured goods.
4. It is difficult to agree with the submission. Rivet is not and cannot be a part or component of clutch face or brakelining. It may be necessary to use rivet or adhesive to attach the manufactured goods to the system or chassis but that will not make them a part or component of the clutch face or brakeline as the case may be. There is no material to show that rivet is a component or part of brakelining or clutch face.
5. In these circumstances we find no merit in the appeals and dismiss the same.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
