9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent : Shri M H Patil & Shri Vijay Kumar, S, Advs. PER : P R Chandrasekharan The Revenue is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. PD/250/M-IV/2003 dated 17.12.2003 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-IV. Vide the said order, the lower appellate authority set aside the order of the adjudicating authority dated 23.9.2003 and accepted the assessable value declared by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld be adopted, inasmuch as the sale to OMC is governed by a consideration other than price in view of the mutuality of assistance to be provided by the OMCs amongst themselves. He relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik - 2009 (242) ELT 358 (Tri-Mum), wherein it was held that reciprocal arrangement between t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng all of them (as directed by Government in public interest) can be considered as transaction value for the discharge of excise duty liability. The said decision was also affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court as reported in 2006 (196) ELT 872 (SC). The learned Counsel also submits that this matter again came up for consideration in the case of M/s Kochi Refineries Ltd. wherein the goods were cleared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been held that IPP based price cannot be considered as transaction value as it was an artificially fixed notional value. In such an agreement, price was definitely not the sole consideration for sale. It is based on this reasoning, it was held in the BPCL case that sale price to OMC cannot be accepted as sole consideration for sale. However, we find that the reasoning adopted is flawed as Impor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
