9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (1) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntal authorities later discovered that the party was claiming from their wholesale purchasers, packing charges in respect of corrugated boxes and wooden cases in which their products were packed at the time of clearance. The department alleged that the party collected a sum of ₹ 9,352.00 between 1-8-75 to 31-9-75 in the name of packing charges on the pressure cookers cleared during the said period. There was, therefore, alleged short levy of ₹ 935.20. A show cause notice was issued and it was held that the contentions of the party that packing is a post-manufacturing expense, excludible from the assessable values was not tenable. The demand was accordingly confirmed for ₹ 935.20. In the appeal it was held that packing char ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material (used for packing pressure cookers) and this was a post-manufacturing expenses. They further submitted that normally they sell the pressure cookers without wooden crates using only the cartons. Therefore, the cost of such wooden crates should not be included in the assessable value. They relied on two judgments of the Supreme Court, which were well known as Voltas and the Atic cases. 3. On behalf of the respondent, Shri Mahesh Kumar submitted that the value of both the cartons in which the pressure cookers are packed and of the wooden crates should be included in the assessable value of the pressure cookers. He relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India and others etc. v. Bombay Tyre Internationa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by rail to distant places. To illustrate this point, the appellants submit that they cleared 418 pcs. in card board cartons during August September, 1975 and 2,230 pcs in wooden crates during the period. Examination of this statement made by the appellants shows that overwhelming majority of pressure cookers were cleared in wooden crates during the relevant period. Besides, in term of the judgment of the Supreme Court the position is quite clear that the cost of the crates has to be included in the assessable value inasmuch as the appellants have not showed us that crates constitute special secondary packing ordered by the customers. It must, therefore, be taken as normal secondary packing and its value included in the assessable valu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
