9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excise duty. Relying upon Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997 (7) TMI 126 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Transaction on the face of it was highly unnatural and was against the norms of the trade practice - The only inference which can be drawn from such an abnormal transaction was that the price paid at the time of delivery was not the sole consideration for sale and the appellant with the aid of buyers had evaded excise duty by issuing invoices/bills showing lower transaction value and getting compensated by indirectly receiving the price in the guise of transit insurance charges - The adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority were right in including the difference of the transit insurance charged actually paid by the appellant and the amount received by the appellant against transit insurance charges in the transaction value for the purpose of assessing excise duty, as such the order cannot be faulted - Decided against assessee. - E/1229/2006 - A/650/2012-EX(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 28-5-2012 - Ajit Bharihoke and Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. Shri Joy Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.R. Meena, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals) dated 13-1-2006, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable for the reason that it is based upon incorrect appreciation of fact and law. Expanding on the argument, learned counsel for the appellant submits the adjudicating authority as also the appellate authority while confirming the demand and imposing penalty on the appellant have failed to appreciate that the appellant during relevant period had cleared the final product at factory gate. Meaning thereby that ownership of the goods stood transferred to the buyer at the factory gate. The appellant merely arranged for transit insurance on behalf of buyers and if he has made some profit in providing transit insurance service to the buyer, it has no bearing on assessable/transaction value of the goods sold. Therefore, it is contended that the authorities concerned have committed the grave error in including the difference of the actual transit insurance premium and the amount charged by the appellant against transit insurance in the price of the goods to work out transaction value for the purpose of calculating excise duty. In suppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be the price actually paid to him for the goods sold and the money value of the additional consideration, if any, flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee in connection with the sale of such goods, and such price-cum-duty, excluding sales tax and other taxes, if any, actually paid, shall be deemed to include the duty payable on such goods. Section 4(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 deals with the definition for the purpose of Section 4 and defines place of removal and time of removal and transaction value as under : (c) place of removal means - (i) a factory or any other place or premises of production or manufacture of the excisable goods; (ii) a warehouse or any other place or premises wherein the excisable goods have been permitted to be deposited without [payment of duty; [(iii) a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory; from where such goods are removed; [(cc) time of removal , in respect of the excisable goods removed from the place of removal referred to in sub-clause (iii) of clause (c), shall be deemed to be the time a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice in the guise of transit insurance charges. Thus in our view, the adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority were right in including the difference of the transit insurance charged actually paid by the appellant and the amount received by the appellant against transit insurance charges in the transaction value for the purpose of assessing excise duty, as such the impugned order cannot be faulted. 12. The judgment relied upon by the appellants in the matter of Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. (supra) is a short judgment and therefore, it would be appropriate to reproduce the same. ORDER The Tribunal accepted the position that equalised freight was charged by the appellant from everyone, but proceeded to say that even though freight cannot be a part of the assessable value that wherever freight actually paid was less than the amount collected by way of freight and transportation charges the difference was appropriated by the appellant and, therefore, the same would be a part of the assessable value. In our opinion, the Tribunal proceeded on an incorrect premise. It was clearly held in Indian Oxygen Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise - 1988 (36) E.L.T. 723 (S.C.) = 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
