2016 (9) TMI 479 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation - determination of assessable value - caustic soda lye supplied to the appellant s sister unit - supply of caustic soda lye to independent buyers also - Held that - in the present case, normal price, i.e., the price of caustic soda lye ordinarily sold by the appellant to independent buyers in the course of wholesale trade is available and therefore by virtue of Section 4(1)(a) ibid that will be deemed to be assessable value obviating the need to go to Section 4(1)(b) ibid and the Valuation Rules framed thereunder. Therefore, the assessable value for caustic soda lye supplied by the appellant to its sister unit would be the same as determined for the independent buyers in terms of Section 4(1)(a) ibid. As a consequence the contention of the appellant regarding deduction of freight element for transporting goods upto the sister unit s premises is rendered irrelevant. - Decided against the appellant

Summary

Issues involved:
- Determination of assessable value of input, caustic soda lye, supplied to the appellant's sister unit located at Harihar, Karnataka.

Comprehensive analysis:
The only issue in this case pertains to the determination of the assessable value of caustic soda lye supplied to the appellant's sister unit. This case involves a second round of litigation, with the earlier round resulting in a remand by CESTAT for a fresh order by the jurisdictional officer. The CESTAT emphasized the impact of the proviso to Rule 6(b)(i) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975, which had not been considered by the lower authorities in the initial proceedings. The CESTAT refrained from expressing an opinion on the merits due to this oversight by the lower authorities.

The crux of the matter lies in the determination of the assessable value of caustic soda lye supplied to the appellant's sister unit. Records indicate that the appellant also supplied this input to independent buyers, with the assessable value for those transactions already approved. The relevant provision, Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1994, outlines the valuation of excisable goods for the purpose of duty imposition. Notably, the concept of transaction value, which is the present-day norm for determining assessable value, was not part of Section 4 at the relevant time. As per Section 4(1)(a), the normal price at which the goods are ordinarily sold to independent buyers in the course of wholesale trade is deemed to be the assessable value, eliminating the need to resort to Section 4(1)(b) and the Valuation Rules.

Based on the discussions and legal provisions, it is concluded that the assessable value for caustic soda lye supplied to the appellant's sister unit should be the same as determined for independent buyers under Section 4(1)(a). Consequently, the appellant's argument regarding the deduction of the freight element for transporting goods to the sister unit's premises is deemed irrelevant. As a result, the appeal is dismissed in favor of maintaining the assessable value consistent with the provisions of the Central Excise Act.