2006 (6) TMI 356

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. - Heard both side and perused the record. 2. There is a duty demand of over Rs. 60 lakhs and equal amount of penalty on the appellant. This is upon a finding that the appellant discharged Central Excise duty liability on a lower value in regard to certain quantities of petroleum products delivered to Hindustan Petroleum on 6 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -10-1999, all deliveries made from 6-10-1999 were required to discharge duty at the revised higher prices. 5. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that delivery of part of the goods had taken place on 5-10-1999 itself and that since the sale was at price prevailing on the day of sale, and since the appellant received payment only in terms of 5-10-1999 prices there is th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the sale price was the normal price and that normal price was required to be treated as assessable value. There is nothing in Section 4 of the Central Excise Act or any other Rules, warranting determination of assessable value based on the price at the time of delivery, in cases where there is time lag between sale and delivery. 7. The view taken in the adjudication Order is contrary t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X