9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (11) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi bearing F.No. 198/B/7/45/81-CX.V, dated 24-8-1981 and the Order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta-IV Division, Calcutta, dated 10-10-80 issued under C. No. V(14) 17-15/78/9471, dated 13-10-80. The Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta-IV Division, Calcutta, in his aforesaid order dated 10-10-80 rejected the post manufacturing expenses, in other words the amount of post manufacturing expenses should be loaded with the assessable value for the purpose of assessment. The Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta-IV Division, however, allowed the cash discount to be abated from the value of the goods before arriving at the assessable value since the cash discount was ascertainable in their price lists. Being aggrieved with the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta-IV Division, Calcutta, preferred an appeal before the Appellate Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta and the Appellate Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta, set aside the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta-IV Division, vide his Order-in-Appeal No. 4/WB of 1981 dated 17-1-8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther decisions or orders that may be given or made by the Supreme Court on the subject. (c) The approvals and assessments as aforesaid will be made after giving the writ petitioners hearing and upon notice to them of at least five weeks. (d) The writ petitioners will be entitled to take such other proceedings or action as they may be advised if they feel aggrieved by the orders of assessments. (e) Until the final disposal of assessment proceedings the Excise authorities are directed not to make any demands in respect of past periods, except the duly admitted to be due by the petitioners, if the same have not been paid. (f) In respect of future periods, Excise authorities will be entitled to assess and levy duty in accordance with aforementioned decision of the Supreme Court and to realise the same in accordance with Law. The petitioner may take appropriate action if they are aggrieved by such assessment. (g) All interim orders are vacated. The Assistant Collector subsequently issued a show cause notice on 22-6-1984 calling upon the assessee to come up with necessary evidence to support their claims. There was some correspondence and ultimately the appellants were heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such claims for abetment and demanded duty against which the instant appeal is filed. They also desired to be heard before decision of the case while further clarification will be made by them. Accordingly a date of personal hearing was fixed for their stay petition on 18-5-85 while the representative appeared and submitted that the payment by instalment was approved by Board. In view of the same the pre-deposit was waived subject to the condition that no adjournment sought for hearing fixed as on 1-6-85 for the appeal. The heads under which the abetment claimed by the appellants though appear to be admissible as per judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. M/s. Bombay Tyres International Ltd. but the main dispute for 1983 (14) E.L.T. 1896 (SC) calculation in arriving to the claims for such abetment. The appellants submitted the claim after arriving to a figure on average per unit sales taking into account the total quantity of their products with the total expenditures under head for all their excisable, non-excisable goods and also the raw materials in the case of freights for such abetment. The abetments which is claimed against the price of one commodity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laimed by the appellants. 5. These deductions have been ordered to be examined with reference to the Supreme Court s judgment in Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd. -1983 (14) E.L.T. 1896 (SC). The appellants have two factories one at Rishra, in West Bengal and another at Hyderabad. Both the units manufacture paints and varnishes and other chemical products classifiable under different tariff items. The appellants charged a uniform price for their particular product throughout the country and even at their factory gate. 6. We heard Shri Bhaskar Gupta, Senior Advocate for the appellants explained the facts and submitted that the deductions claimed by the appellants are under 3 heads, namely (1) freight and transport charges, (2) rates and taxes:(a) turnover tax, (b) surcharge on sales tax, (c) purchase tax, (d) octroi duty; (3) Discounts and rebates consisting of (a) cash discounts, (b) prompt payment discount (c) turnover rebate (d) commission to stockists (e) no claim discounts (f) special discounts. Referring to freight the learned Advocate stated that the goods of the company are despatched to numerous points in the country in trucks carrying goods including som ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, a simple average would not be correct. He, however, submitted that if average is worked out on each separate tariff item, a workable solution may be found. In respect of discounts, Shri Kumar submitted that such discounts have to be claimed in the price list and for this purpose the matter may, if considered necessary, be remanded to the Assistant Collector. 10. We have considered the arguments of both sides. In principle there can be no doubt - and both the lower authorities have agreed that in the light of the Supreme Court judgment in Bombay Tyre International the appellants are entitled to deductions mentioned therein and by the Calcutta High Court. The Assistant Collector wanted the factory-wise and commodity wise figures and did not accept the average figures worked - out by the appellants. The Collector (Appeals) appeared to have ordered the acceptance of average figures on the basis of separate commodities. 11. We have given careful thought to the facts of the case. Insofar as the principles are concerned, there is no doubt about them because the Supreme Court in their judgment have laid down such principles. The question in this matter is only how to work out th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
