9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain other charges were collected by the appellants from wholesale dealers which charges were not disclosed in the price list filed by them. After conducting investigation and recording statements of certain dealers and factory officials, show cause notice dated 17-1-1985 was issued alleging that differential duty amounting to Rs. 16,54,137.52 was payable by the appellants. After hearing the assessee, Collector confirmed the demand amounting to Rs. 15,73,132.17. He imposed penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- on the assessee under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. He ordered confiscation of the Plant and machinery of the assessee but permitted its redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. The present appeal is directed against this order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s judgment in the case of Spring Fresh Drinks v. CCE - 1991 (54) E.L.T. 333. In this judgment (paragraph 18) Tribunal held that delivery and collection charges had nothing to do with the manufacture of products as they were charges for delivery of filled bottles and collection of empty bottles. Therefore, these charges had to be excluded from the assessable value. Following the ratio of this judgment we hold that duty liability arrived at on this count does not sustain. 6. Second ground is the amount collected by the appellants at the rate of Rs. 30/- per crate as deposit. On such deposit the appellants were paying interest at the rate of 12%. Collector in paragraph 14 of his order observed that normal rate of interest chargeable on loan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e made on account of hire charges for such returnable containers. In this connection, Shri Sridharan refers to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Indian Oxygen Ltd. In that judgment it has been held by the Supreme Court that rental for cylinders were charges made were for ancillary and allied venture and had no relation with the activity of manufacture. It was held that on this ground such charges were not includible in the assessable value. We, therefore, hold that confirmation made on this count also does not sustain. 9. Last item covers service charges levied at the rate of Rs. 6.66 Paise per crate. It is claimed by Shri Sridharan that this charges is for transportation of filled bottled and is, therefore, deductible from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred to. He stated that these statements were not available in the appeal memorandum. He submitted that Collector has taken cognizance of the contents of these statements as is evident from his discussions in paragraph 9 of the impugned order. Shri Sridharan referred to the impugned order and also to the show cause notice and claimed that dealers statements merely show that there was no written agreement between the company and the Dealers. In the absence of the copies of the statements, we are not able to determine whether the contents of the statements have any direct bearing on any aspect of the case. The claim made by the learned JDR about the service charges being other than transportation charges, however, must be considered seri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
