ORDER
K.L. Rekhi, Member (T)
1. The Respondents manufactured Vinyl Acetate Monomer. They supplied it to their customers in road takners and drums/barrels Both the road tankers and drums/barrels belonged to the customers and the Respondents incurred no expenditure in respect thereof. The department admits that the containers were durably and were returnable to the customers. At the same time, the department seeks to deny exclusion of the cost of the containers in the assessable value of the goods on the ground that Section 4(4)(d)(i) provides for the cost of durable packing which is returnable by the buyer to the assessee and not vice-versa. This is the only point agitated in the two appeals of the department.
2. During the hearing today, the Ld. Representative of the department was fair enough to state that there were a series of High Court judgements and the judgment of this Tribunal which were against the department on the point at issue. As an illustration, he cited paragraph 19 of the larger Bench judgement of this Tribunal reported at Associated Cement Company and Ors. He also cited that the deptt. had taken the point in appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and hence the present appeals.
3. The Respondents cited a series of judgements of this Tribunal in other cases in which it had been held, on the authority of the High Court judgments mentioned therein, that the cost of durable and returnable packing belonging to the customer could not be included in the assessable value of the goods. The Respondents also cited that they had not claimed any further relief in the two Cross Objections filed by them and hence the Cross Objections were unnecessary.
4. Following the ratio of paragraph 19 of the larger Bench judgment of this Tribunal referred to by the Ld. Representative of the deptt., we dismiss both appeals of the department. The two Cross Objections filed by the Respondents are dismissed as infructuous.