AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
On the request of the learned counsel for the appellant, we have called for the record of Civil Appeal No. 5856 of 2010 which raises identical issue as involved in the present appeal and heard along with the instant appeal.
The question of law which is sought to be raised by the Revenue/Appellant in this appeal is as to whether the value addition made to the base vehicle viz. �the Jeep� in question, by way of bullet proofing, has to be added while arriving at transaction value for the purpose of excise duty. We may mention that is the normal course, the Jeeps are manufactured by the respondent/assessee without any such bullet proofing. However, there was a specific requirement of the Police Department in various States for supply of Jeeps with bullet proofing system, the Jeeps were supplied to them after getting the same bullet proofing. However, the admitted facts are that as far as clearance of these Jeeps from the factory of the respondent/assessee is concerned, they were cleared without any bullet proofing. It in only after clearance that the Jeeps were sent to get the processing of bullet proofing carried out by job workers outside the factory premises. The Tribunal has, thus, rightly held that in such circumstances, the cost of bullet proofing could not be added to arrive at the transaction value. The order of the Tribunal does not warrant any interference.
These appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.