2007 (3) TMI 524 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Rectification of errors in the Tribunal's Final Order regarding the assessable value of goods, inclusion of depot as a place of removal, application of Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, and the argument of time bar.

Rectification of errors in assessable value: The applicants sought rectification of errors in the Tribunal's Final Order, arguing that packing charges should not be included in the assessable value of goods cleared from the factory for sale in the depot. They relied on the Supreme Court judgment in M/s. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat to support their contention that the Tribunal erred in reading the statutory provisions.

Inclusion of depot as a place of removal: The applicants contended that the depot was included as a place of removal only from 13-5-2003 onwards, and therefore, packing charges should not be part of the assessable value for the period prior to this date. They argued that the transaction value of goods sold at the depot should be considered as the assessable value.

Application of Section 4(1)(a): The applicants pointed out that Section 4(1)(a) was not invoked against them in the show cause notice, which instead referred to Section 4(1)(b) read with Rule 7 of the Valuation Rules 2000. They cited the Hindustan Polymers Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Guntur case to support their argument that the Tribunal cannot base its decision on a different provision than the one mentioned in the notice.

Argument of time bar: The applicants raised the issue of time bar in their appeals memorandum, but no finding was recorded on this matter. The respondent opposed the plea for rectification, arguing that the applicants were seeking a re-hearing of the appeals and that the time bar issue was not raised before the Tribunal.

Judgment: The Tribunal found in favor of the applicants, acknowledging that the depot was designated as a place of removal only from 13-5-2003 onwards. Therefore, for the period before this date, packing charges should not be included in the assessable value of goods cleared for sale at the depot. The Tribunal also affirmed that the transaction value of goods, including packing costs, should be adopted as the assessable value for the period after 13-5-2003. On the issue of time bar, the Tribunal agreed with the respondent that since the arguments were not raised in the appeals, no error arose from not addressing this submission. Consequently, the ROM applications were allowed in part.

*(Pronounced in court on 30-3-2007)*