2017 (1) TMI 1476 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit of N/N. 4/2007-C.E., dated 1-3-2007 - clearances of packaged Cements to individuals - Held that - the assessee-appellants have sold the goods directly to the consumer which includes the Government agencies, builders, institutions and individuals without involving a retail sale agency or other institutions, and has, therefore, not fulfilled the criteria of retail sale . Hence, the definition of Retail Sale as per Rule 2(q) of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 will not apply - the sale to the individual without any intermediary person is entitled for concessional rate of duty - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 4/2007-C.E.
2. Eligibility for concessional rate of duty for direct sales to consumers.
3. Application of the definition of "Retail Sale" under Rule 2(q) of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977.
4. Impact of direct sales without involving a retail sale agency on duty concession eligibility.

Analysis:
1. The case involved cross-appeals by the assessee-appellants and the Department against the Order-in-Original related to the concessional rate of duty for clearances of packaged cement to different types of consumers.
2. The assessee-appellants claimed entitlement to the concessional rate of duty when selling directly to consumers like Government agencies, builders, institutions, and individuals, apart from selling to agencies on MRP basis.
3. The Tribunal considered the definition of "Retail Sale" under Rule 2(q) of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. It was noted that direct sales to consumers without involving a retail sale agency did not fulfill the criteria of "retail sale," impacting the eligibility for the concessional rate of duty.
4. Referring to a previous decision, the Tribunal highlighted that when sales are direct without any intermediary person and not meant for resale, the concessional rate of duty can be availed, especially when the packages are cleared without marketing of RSP and with an endorsement of "not for resale."
5. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that sales to individuals without an intermediary person are entitled to the concessional rate of duty, aligning with the previous decision. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal by the assessee-appellants was allowed with consequential relief.
6. The appeal by the assessee-appellants was allowed, while the cross-appeal by the Department was dismissed, based on the Tribunal's interpretation of the eligibility criteria for the concessional rate of duty in direct sales scenarios.