9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals together for the disposal. 2. M/s Bentek Electrical Corporation, Trichur are manufacturers of electric ceiling fans, an excisable commodity. Departmental investigation reveals clearances of the fans without payment of duty in excess of the exemption limit. No excise formalities were also observed. Penal proceedings were initiated. The lower authority confirmed the demand of excise duty of Rs. 15,96,583/- and imposed an equal penalty under Section 11AC. The period involved is from April 1998 to December 1999. Further he confiscated 288 Nos. of ceiling fans which were available in the premises. Redemption fine of Rs. 3000/- was imposed. The Commissioner (Appeals) gave some relief to the party in respect of the value of the clearances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 1999, i.e. before the Finance Bill 2001 received the assent of the President demand for interest under Section 11AB is not legal or proper. (iv) In view of the above submissions, the learned Advocate prayed that the demand for duty may be confined to an amount of Rs. 3,87,511.00 which the appellant had already deposited. The penalty imposed under Section 11AC is very high and therefore the same may be reduced. Since the interest under Section 11AB is not applicable to cases prior to Finance Act 2001, therefore the demand for interest may kindly set aside. 5. The learned Jt. CDR reiterated the findings in the Order-in-Appeal. 6. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The appellants contention is that they were under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confined to a period of six months. The party has computed the duty amount to Rs. 3,87,511/-. However, the departmental authorities shall compute the correct liability for the normal period and collect the same. Thus we allow the party s appeal (E/653/2003) in the above terms by remand for computation of duty liability. E/661/2003 7. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue. The Original authority while demanding duty took the value of each fan at Rs. 1350/- on the ground that the stickers mentioning the price at Rs. 1350/- were affixed on the package. The party contended that there were different varieties of fan and adoption of a uniform price of Rs. 1350/- for valuation purposes is not correct. It was also contended that for the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cartons were procured they printed MRP of Rs. 1350/-. But they manufactured 25 varieties of fans of different sizes. Since MRP of Rs. 1,350/- was unduly high, they fixed different MRP for each variety and stickers of the revised MRP were affixed on the cartons. Further our attention was invited to Board s Circular No. 673/64/2002-CX., dated 28-10-2002 as reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. T4, wherein it is clarified that when one MRP is scored out (even if it remains visible) and another MRP printed on the packages, it could not be said that the package has two MRPs printed on it since the scored out MRP could not be considered as and MRP either by the seller or the consumer and hence scored out MRP is to be ignored. Therefore, the Explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
