9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (3) TMI 216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n or by contract. Apart from the basic Central Excise duty payable under Items 26 and 26AA of the Tariff, respectively, these goods were liable to auxiliary duty equal to the basic duty. Such auxiliary duty was, however, not to exceed 20% of the value of the goods under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. As such value had not been approved by the competent authority by that time, the appellants paid auxiliary duty equal to the basic duty. They added the basic duty and the auxiliary duty as actually paid by them in their sale bills issued to their customers and collected the duties accordingly from their customers. Later, on approval of the values under Section 4, they filed 13 refund claims for steel melting scrap of 12 re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcess auxiliary duty to the customers in advance and then to submit the proof thereof to the Assistant Collector in order to enable him to sanction the refund due to them. 4. The learned Representative of the department opposed the appellants claim on two counts :- (i) It was a policy decision of the Government, in the interest of administrative simplification, to collect the steel ingot stage duty and steel product stage duty in one lump sum amount at the time of clearance of the steel products from integrated steel plants. (ii) Value of the goods under Section 4 had to be determined at the time and place of removal. Such value could not be revised downward later on by the appellants making some refund to the customers. 5. We ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evant exemption notification inforce, was the steel product stage duty and, consequently, deduction of the full product stage duty paid had to be made from the cum-duty bill price to arrive at the assessable value. We order that it be done. 6. It is not correct to say that the appellants are seeking to reduce their sale price subsequent to the time of removal of the goods. The auction/ contract price remains the same. It is only the amount of auxiliary duty that is changing because of the ad valorem option provided for in the statutory notification itself. What happened was that when the appellants were called upon to pay more duty, they collected more from their customers. And now that the department is called upon to reduce that duty a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
