9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (6) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals (with the cross-objections) arise out of common order-in-appeal, they were heard together disposed of by this common order. 2. We have heard Ms. Amrita Mitra, Advocate, for M/s CEAT Tyre of India Ltd. and Shri G.D. Sharma, JDR, for the Revenue. 3. We have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. It is seen that the matter relates to the packing of tubes and other products. The type of packing had been referred to by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) in his order as under : (i) Thread/Rubber gum .... Corrugated boxes (ii) Cushion gum .... Fibre containers, wooden boxes (iii) Thread repair gum .... Fibre cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the returnable drums, he mentioned that there was no agreement with the customers and in the absence of actual return or an agreement for return, their cost was includible in the assessable value of vulcanising cement. 5. We have carefully considered the matter. As regards the wooden boxes, we find that the Supreme Court decision in the case of Geep Industrial Syndicate - 1992 (61) E.L.T. 328 (SC) will be applicable and their cost is not includible in the assessable value of Cushion, Thread Repair Gum, Tube Repair Gum and Unvulcanised Thread Strips. 6. In so far as the corrugated boxes and fibre containers are concerned, the Supreme Court decision in the case of Geep Industrial Syndicate, referred to above, clearly holds that their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not includible in the assessable value. The vulcanising cement when packed in tins of 5 lts, 250 lts. and 200 lts, it is already included in the assessable value and only when the customers bring their own drums for packing of quantities above 200 lts, the assessee had claimed deduction. In the case of K. Radha Krishnan v. Inspector of Central Excise, 1987 (27) E.L.T. 598 (SC), the Supreme Court had clarified that it is not the physical capability of the packing to be returned which is the determining factor and what is required for the purpose of attracting the applicability of the exclusion clause in Section 4(4)(d)(ii) for returnable packing is that the packing must be returnable by the buyer to the assessee. In the case of Hindustan P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
