1989 (5) TMI 75 - SC - Central Excise

Whether post-manufacturing expenses of 14.4% on gasket and 6% on piston rings were deductible in arriving at the assessable value of the goods covered under Tariff Item No. 34A on the basis of the price lists 89 and 90 both dated 16th May, 1980? Held that - The judgment of the High Court, insofar as it disallows post-manufacturing expenses contrary to the order of 9th May, 1983 and the judgment dated 7th October, 1983 in the case of Bombay Tyres International Limited (1983 (10) TMI 51 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI) will stand set aside.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deductibility of post-manufacturing expenses in arriving at the assessable value of goods under Tariff Item No. 34A.
2. Interpretation of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 regarding permissible deductions.
3. Challenge to the decision of the Assistant Collector through a Writ Petition in the High Court of Bombay.
4. Impact of previous Supreme Court judgments on the deductibility of post-manufacturing expenses.
5. Failure to reach an agreement on a format order for submissions.
6. Setting aside the High Court's decision disallowing post-manufacturing expenses.
7. Directions given to authorities for permitting deductions and amendments in price lists.
8. Filing of revised price lists and finalization of assessments by authorities.
9. Payment of revised amounts to the Revenue and submission of orders to the Court.
10. Preservation of existing bank guarantees and raising pleas of limitation for refund claims.
11. Setting aside original assessment for a fresh assessment in accordance with the format.
12. Liberty to request listing for directions after the fresh assessment.

Analysis:
1. The Supreme Court considered the deductibility of post-manufacturing expenses in determining the assessable value of goods under Tariff Item No. 34A. The Assistant Collector rejected the appellant's contention, emphasizing that only specific deductions like trade discounts and packing charges were permissible under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
2. The Court referred to previous judgments clarifying the deductibility of trade discounts and other expenses, expanding the list of allowable deductions beyond the traditional ones. This led to a reevaluation of the High Court's decision disallowing certain post-manufacturing expenses, especially in light of subsequent orders by the Assistant Collector allowing similar deductions in other cases.
3. Despite attempts to reach an agreement on a format order for submissions, the parties failed to do so, leading to a hearing on the terms of the format order. The Court reviewed the drafts exchanged by the parties and set out specific clauses to constitute the final format order.
4. The Court ultimately set aside the High Court's decision disallowing post-manufacturing expenses, providing detailed directions to the authorities for permitting deductions and amendments in price lists. The timeline for submissions, finalization of assessments, and payment to the Revenue was outlined, with provisions for challenges, bank guarantees, and pleas of limitation.
5. The original assessment was set aside, and a fresh assessment was ordered in accordance with the format. The parties were granted liberty to request listing for directions after the completion of the fresh assessment process.