9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (3) TMI 981 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - toilet soaps exclusively to the CSD Canteens, under the Ministry of Defence - requirement to affix MRP - Section 4A of the CEA - Held that - the Tribunal in the case of Charms Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. 2017 (3) TMI 1129 - CESTAT MUMBAI , where it was held that A maximum retail price is affixed on the impugned package does not, of itself, render the goods liable to comply with the provisions of the law relating to maximum retail price - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
1. Central Excise duty calculation on MRP basis for toilet soaps supplied to CSD Canteens under Ministry of Defence. Analysis: The appeal was filed against Order-in-Appeal No.91/2007 dated 29.5.2007 and Order-in-Appeal No. 72/2008-CE dated 03/04/2008. The appellants are involved in the manufacture of toilet soaps subject to Central Excise duty under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They supplied the soaps exclusively to CSD Canteens under the Ministry of Defence, affixed with MRP. The Department sought to charge Central Excise duty under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act on MRP basis, contrary to the transaction value paid by the appellant. The appellant, feeling aggrieved, filed the present appeals. During the proceedings, the appellant's counsel and the Revenue's representative were heard. Reference was made to a previous Tribunal case involving Charms Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, where it was established that CSD is an in-house procurement agency for the armed forces, not subject to legal metrology statutes. The affixing of MRP does not automatically render the goods liable for compliance with MRP laws or Excise duty levy. The focus should be on compliance with the Standards of Weights & Measures Rules, 1977, which do not apply to institutional buyers like CSD. The price determined under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 should be the basis for duty computation, not the MRP. In line with the precedent set by the Charms Cosmetics case, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeals. The judgment was pronounced and dictated in Open Court on 07/02/2018.
|
