9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2004 (10) TMI 481 - AT - Central ExciseDetermination of assessable value of pesticides - Removal of Goods other than sale purpose under rule 7 - HELD THAT - Under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act the assessable value of the goods on each removal shall in a case where the goods are sold for delivery at the time and place of the removal be the transaction value. In any other case the value shall be determined under the Central Excise Valuation Rules. As in the present matter the goods are only sold from the consignment stock agent s place the assessable value has to be determined under the Valuation Rules 2000 and admittedly the Rule applicable is Rule 7. Once the normal transaction value of the impugned goods sold from other place at or about the same time is ascertainable there is no need to determine the assessable value on the basis of price at which the goods may be sold subsequent to the time of removal of goods. The Board has also clarified this position vide Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX dated 1-7-2002. A doubt was raised as the definition of normal transaction value Rule 2(b) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules does not indicate the time period over which the greatest aggregate quantity is to be computed. Accordingly we set aside the impugned Order and allow the appeal.
Issues involved: Determination of assessable value of pesticides manufactured by M/s. E.I. Du Pont India Pvt. Ltd.
Summary: In the appeal filed by M/s. E.I. Du Pont India Pvt. Ltd., the issue pertains to the determination of the assessable value of pesticides manufactured by them. The Appellant contended that the assessable value of the goods has been wrongly determined based on sale prices prevailing on dates subsequent to the date of removal of goods from the factory under Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. The Appellant argued that they have paid duty based on the normal transaction value and the greatest quantity sold by the consignment agent, in accordance with Board Circulars. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that the transaction value can be determined based on future prices if goods are not sold at or about the same time as the removal. The Tribunal considered the submissions of both sides and referred to Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, which mandates that the assessable value shall be determined under the Central Excise Valuation Rules if goods are not sold at the time and place of removal. Rule 7 of the Valuation Rules states that the assessable value shall be the normal transaction value of goods sold from another place at or about the same time or at the time nearest to the removal of goods under assessment. The normal transaction value is defined as the transaction value at which the greatest aggregate quantity of goods are sold. The Tribunal noted that the Appellants had paid duty based on the price at which the greatest aggregate quantity of goods are sold, as per the normal transaction value. The Tribunal emphasized that once the normal transaction value is ascertainable, there is no need to determine the assessable value based on prices subsequent to the removal of goods. The Tribunal referred to a Board Circular clarifying that the time period for computing the greatest aggregate quantity should be taken as the whole day, and the transaction value would refer to the price at which the largest quantity of identical goods are sold on a particular day. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by M/s. E.I. Du Pont India Pvt. Ltd.
|
