9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 186 - AT - Central ExciseValuation of goods - Determination of assessable value of the oils which are being supplied by the appellant to other oil marketing companies - Held that - Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE 2005 (2) TMI 357 - CESTAT, BANGALORE has held in favour of the assessee. Revenue s appeal filed against the assessee was dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court as reported in 2006 (1) TMI 592 - Supreme Court of India . Another decision, which is in the same appellants case is Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE, Goa 2008 (4) TMI 632 - CESTAT, MUMBAI - as there are decisions in the appellants own case as also in other cases which stand confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, we deem it fit to follow the same - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues: Assessable value of oils supplied by the appellant to other oil marketing companies.
Analysis: The dispute in the present appeal revolves around the assessable value of oils supplied by the appellant to other oil marketing companies as per the MOU. The lower authorities had confirmed the demands based on the assessable value at which the appellant sold the oil to its dealers. The Tribunal referred to various decisions to settle the issue at hand. In the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, and the Revenue's appeal against the assessee was dismissed by the Supreme Court. Another relevant decision cited was Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE, Goa. These decisions, along with others, were considered to support the appellant's case. Despite a contrary decision in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd., the Tribunal distinguished it in a subsequent matter involving Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin v. M/s. Kochi Refineries Ltd. Given the decisions in the appellant's own case and others confirmed by the Supreme Court, the Tribunal decided to follow the same precedent. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.
|
