1983 (5) TMI 224 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 regarding the assessment of excise duty based on tariff values or value determined under Section 4 before 1-10-1975.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the assessment of excise duty for Aluminium Conductors Steel Reinforced (A.C.S.R.) and All Aluminium Conductors (A.A.C.) manufactured by the appellants. The appellants preferred to have their goods assessed based on the value determined under Section 4 of the Act rather than the tariff values fixed by the Central Government. The central issue was whether, before 1-10-1975, an assessee had the option to pay duty based on tariff values or the value determined under Section 4, whichever was more beneficial. The appellants argued that prior to the amendment in 1975, they had the right to choose the method of assessment. However, the respondent contended that Section 3 of the Act, in conjunction with Rule 9-A of the Central Excise Rules, provided the authority to levy excise duty based on tariff values where notified by the Central Government.

The Tribunal examined the legal provisions and observed that the language of Section 3 remained unchanged before 1-10-1975. The insertion of sub-section (3) to Section 4 clarified that the provisions of Section 4 would not apply to excisable goods for which tariff values were fixed under Section 3(2). The Tribunal agreed with the respondent's argument that Section 3, along with Rule 9-A, authorized the levy of duty based on tariff values for goods where such values were notified. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that Section 4 was the sole section for determining the value of excisable goods. It was held that for goods with fixed tariff values, the alternative method was under Section 3 read with Rule 9-A, making the assessment based on tariff values mandatory.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Appellate Collector, dismissing the appeal. The judgment clarified that for excisable goods with notified tariff values, the assessment must be based on the values determined under Section 3 and Rule 9-A, and not on the values under Section 4.