9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a place of removal under the law and smaller packages are sold from there only and not from the factory, applying Section 4(1)(a) of CEA, the transaction value of such packages including cost of packing has to be adopted as the assessable value. In our view, since the value can be thus determined under Section 4(1)(a) of CEA, there is no need to take recourse to the Valuation Rules. Interpretation of Rule 7 is also, therefore, not necessary in this case. Accordingly, we order that the extra amount recovered towards cost of packing is to be added to the assessable value but we agree with the lower appellate authority that the value needs to be recalculated by the adjudicating authority treating the amount as cum-duty-price . Hence, we uphol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be the value at which such quantities are cleared. Also the phrase such goods has been used which is interpreted by the Hon. Tribunal in case of Savita Chemicals 2000 (119) E.L.T. 394 (T.)=1999 (34) RLT 573 to mean that the goods should remain in the same condition in which it is removed from the factory gate. The Hon ble Supreme Court upheld the said judgment of the tribunal. As there is no change in the condition of the goods, the goods have remained such goods as were cleared from the factory. So the duty is not leviable on the packing charges recovered from the customers. Also the Addl. Commissioner vide order No. DK/125-128/2000, dated 27-12-2000 for Show Cause Notice issued demanding duty for the period prior to 1-7-2000 had set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessable value. He also cites the decision in the case of ICI India Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad - 2003 (151) E.L.T. 629 (Tri. - Bang.) in his support. 3. The learned SDR supports the order passed by the lower appellate authority and cites Board's Circular No. 354/81/2000-TR4, dated 30-6-2000 which in paragraph 6 states as under: - Transaction Value includes receipts/recoveries or charges incurred or expenses provided for in connection with the manufacturing, marketing, selling of the excisable goods to be not be part of the price payable for the goods sold. In other words, whatever elements which enrich the value of the goods before their marketing and were held by Hon ble Supreme Court to be includible in value under the erstwhile Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re sold after clearance from the factory. Since depot is a place of removal under the law and smaller packages are sold from there only and not from the factory, applying Section 4(1)(a) of CEA, the transaction value of such packages including cost of packing has to be adopted as the assessable value. In our view, since the value can be thus determined under Section 4(1)(a) of CEA, there is no need to take recourse to the Valuation Rules. Interpretation of Rule 7 is also, therefore, not necessary in this case. 5. Accordingly, we order that the extra amount recovered towards cost of packing is to be added to the assessable value but we agree with the lower appellate authority that the value needs to be recalculated by the adjudicating author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
