9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bag or pouch which is placed inside a unit carton. A number, of such unit cartons are then packed in a bigger outer carton made of corrugated board. There is no dispute that the products manufactured and cleared by the respondents are invariably sold in outer carton packing. The period of the dispute is from 25-3-1982 to 31-10-1982. The Assistant Collector first approved price lists without including the value of the outer carton. Later, he issued a Show Cause Notice on 22-1-1983 demanding duty for the aforesaid period on the basis that cost of the outer cartons ought to have been included in the assessable value. On adjudication, he confirmed this basis but restricted the demand to six months because of the limitation factor. In appeal, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid paragraph says is that the provision for re-opening the question of classification for the past period does not exist in Rule 173 B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 but elsewhere under the law. Thus, this paragraph does not say that past assessment cannot be re-opened at all. It only says that for such re-opening, re-course should be had to other provisions by the law. Such other provisions are Sections 11 A and 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Previously, such provisions existed in Rules 10, 10A and 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. There is a more specific judgment of this Tribunal dealing with this aspect of the matter and it is based on High Court judgments cited therein, chiefly - 1981 E.L.T. 114 (Delhi)- Bawa Po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urts, it is not open to us to decide the present appeal in the light of those obsolete High Court judgments. 4. Coming to the point on merits, the learned representative of the Department stated that the Collector (Appeals) has mis-read the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Godfrey Philips India Ltd. and that the respondents case was clearly distinguishable from that of Godfrey Philips India Ltd. inasmuch as while wholesale buyers of cigarettes did not require the outer C.F.C. cartons but such cartons had to be used for the purpose of smooth transport of cigarettes from the factory, in the respondents case the outer cartons were necessary for wholesale sales throughout. We agree with him. The products sold in the present case are fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
