9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (5) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand the said amount with interest under Section 11AB and, impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the same was confirmed without imposing any penalty vide Order-in-Original. Commissioner (Appeals) uphold the order in original. Held that- It can be seen from the Notification that Government in their own wisdom has fixed tariff value of 60% of the retail sale price i.e., declared or required to be declared on the packages of articles of apparels. In this case, both the lower authorities have not disputed the existence of pricelist issued by the appellant to the dealer and it is also not disputed that the price as contained in the pricelist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said amount with interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and, impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the same was confirmed without imposing any penalty vide Order-in-Original No. 44/2005 dated 27-10-2005/31-10-2005. 2.1 Aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating Authority, the appellants preferred an appeal to the learned Commissioner (A). The learned Commissioner (A) after considering the oral and written submissions came to the conclusion that Order-in-Original is correct, holding so upheld the Order-in-Original and rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. Hence, this appeal. 3. The learned counsel app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... les of apparels cleared from their factory. It is his submission that after taking the benefit of Notification i.e., discharging duty liability on the 60% of the value of retail sale price, the appellants have collected over and above the said amount from their customers. He would submit that this would fall under the transaction value, as the money consideration received is in excess than the price. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is whether the lower authorities were correct in coming to the conclusion that the transaction value should be held as applicable in this case, as the appellants have collected money over and above the invoice raised b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said notification. "Tariff values for articles of apparel and clothing accessories not knitted or crocheted- Notification No. 8/2001-C.E. (N.T.) superseded In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 8/2001-Central Excise (N.T.), dated the 1st March, 2001 [G.S.R. 142(E), dated the 1st March, 2001], except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Government, hereby fixes tariff value in respect of articles of apparel, not knitted or crocheted, all sorts, falling under sub-heading No. 6201.00 of the Firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
