9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (12) TMI 433X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r in this respect. In para 6, the ld. Collector (Appeals) held that the second appeal of the Appellant is in respect, of the impugned order dated 22-9-1999, the Superintendent under which a demand of Rs. 4,57,89,549.00 has been confirmed. He ordered that except for the demand in the second impugned order regarding the duty liability that the amount of interest which accrued on the deposits from the commission stockists which has not been quantified in the order, I uphold the remaining portion of the order confirming the aforesaid amount of the demand . The ld. Collector (Appeals) upheld the 2 impugned orders except for the observations in paras 5.6 and 6 as above. 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the Appellants are man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duction is allowed as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and that this will form part of the assessable value. On miscellaneous expenditure, the adjudicating authority held that no deduction is allowed as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and, therefore, the claim for such deduction was rejected. On average transportation and transit insurance, the adjudicating authority held that the Hon ble Mumbai High Court in the case of M/s. ITC Limited v. U.O.I. held that the cost of transportation and insurance is permissible only when the same can be established from the account maintained by the assessee. He further observed that the claim of the assessee for average transportation and transit insurance charges is rejected. F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... distribution charges, the ld. Collector (Appeals) held : I find that in this case, after removal of the goods from the factory, the sale is actually being affected by the stockists and in view of this situation, even the expenses which are incurred after removal of the goods from the factory till the time the sale takes place, all the expenses incurred have to be included in the assessable value. In view of this legal position and in view of the opinion given by the appellants regarding distribution charges, the deduction in respect of charges cannot be allowed. He therefore upheld the order of the Asstt. Collector on this point. 5. On miscellaneous expenditure and average distribution charges, the Collector (Appeals) held : I find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ountervailing duty paid on imported caprolactum is concerned, the same should have been allowed as the same is fully covered by the Larger Bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Dai Ichi Karkaria [l996 (81) E.L.T. 676 (T)] in which the Tribunal held that while calculating the value of captively consumed input, abatement of duty paid as additional/countervailing duty shall be admissible. He submitted that the ratio of this decision squarely covers their case and, therefore, they may be allowed abatement of this duty. 8. The ld. Counsel submitted that in so far as deduction towards commission to stockists is concerned, their case was covered by the provisions of Rule 6(a) of Valuation Rules, 1975; that this rule clearly provides tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s margin payable to the Authorised Representatives. The Appellants themselves are rendering publicity and sale services to the customers and the cost of the same was included in the assessable value. Rule 6(a) of Valuation Rules is applicable when goods are sold in retail. The dealer s margin given in respect of a comparable commodity can be given in respect of goods which are sold in retail. In the instant case, the retail price at which each vehicle was sold is Rs. 1,67,000/-. In the price list, they claimed Rs. 5,100/- as deduction towards the dealer s margin. It works out to about 2.9%. Taking into account the trade practice, the amount of Rs. 5,100/- is not unreasonable and it is in accordance with the trade practice. The ld. Counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... puts cannot be allowed. He reiterated the findings of the lower authorities both on payment of duty on the input while calculating the cost of intermediate product captively consumed as also on the admissibility of commission paid to the consignment stockists. 12. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. We note that in so far as payment of duty paid on inputs imported is concerned, the case of the Appellants is fully covered by the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. (supra). We do not see any reason to disagree with the above view of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal and hold that deduction while calculating the value of the captively consumed input will be admissible in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
