9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (11) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant. Shri J.P.Kaushik, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice U.L. Bhat, President]. - Respondent was engaged in the manufacture of tyres and air bags falling under erstwhile TI-68. The dispute in the appeal relates to duty payable on air bags in respect of clearances for the home consumption made during the period 31-12-1984 to 28-12-1985. Though the air bags were intended for us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on the basis of cum-duty price. That being so, the amount of Rs. 30,389.25 which was the duty calculated on the wholesale price amount should be treated as part of the wholesale price and assessable value and duty calculated accordingly. This is supported by the observations of the Supreme Court in Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Bata India Limited - 1996 (84) E.L.T. 164 = 1996 (14) RL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee at the time of clearance of the goods or it was paid subsequently. What is material is that the excise duty was payable on the goods. The impugned order in this behalf is, therefore, correct. We are told that there is an appeal against the imposition of penalty filed by the respondent which is pending in another Bench.
3. Appeal is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
