TMI Blog1997 (8) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h are packaging materials was not included by them in their price which formed the basis of assessment of duty. 2. Learned Consultant, Shri K.L. Rekhi, appearing on behalf of the appellants stated that out of total demand of Rs. 1,87,685/-, a sum of Rs. 1,19,448/- related to the period which was beyond six months prior to the date of the show cause notice and was hence barred by limitation since the elements of suppression, wilful mis-statement, etc. were totally absent. The notice was issued on 26-9-1994 whereas the credits in question had been taken in the month of March, 1994, the last of which was on 23-3-1994. At the material time, the relevant rule, namely, 57-I provided for the issue of notice within a period of six months from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsistent with the accepted principles of costing, in support of which he filed the relevant extracts from a publications entitled `Guide to Company Balance Sheet and Profit Loss Account . He concluded his argument, with the statement that the Commissionerate concerned as well as the neighbouring Commissionerates are granting relief by way of Modvat credit in such cases of assessment of aerated waters. He also invited my attention to the Board s instructions dated 23-1-1996 in respect of patterns supplied by the Customers to the manufacturers wherein it was held that there should be no addition to the assessable value on account of such patterns. 4. In reply, it was stated by Shri V.R. Sethi, learned Departmental Representative that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rior to that date is valid and I accept the same. 6. As regards the plea on merits, the price structure for the product which was enclosed with the price list which was approved by the Assistant Collector indicated a proportionate sum as the cost of the bottles. What stands excluded from the scope of the expression inputs are those packaging materials the cost of which is not included in the value of the final product. Since the appellant had included a certain amount on a pro rata basis depending upon the number of occasions the bottle is used on repetitive basis, it cannot be said that the price had not been included to attract the mischief of the relevant clause. In the case of such containers like glass bottles which are used for a nu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|