9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Appellant. Shri V.C. Khole, Jt. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal No. CEX-XI/JMJ/5/916/NSK/APL/2005, dated 3-2-2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & (Appeals), Nashik and Order-in-Original No. 02/CEX/2005, dated 31-1-2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik. As the issue involved is common in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruction method as decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Ujagar Prints - 1988 (38) E.L.T. 535 (S.C.) case. The case of the Revenue is that even in respect of toothpaste which are not intended for retail sale and which is supplied as free sample, the appellant should have discharged excise duty under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, notices were issued and demands confirme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods on job work basis, they have followed the principles of valuation settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Ujagar Print case i.e. on the basis of cost construction method. 3.1 The learned Counsel also submits that the issue has come up for consideration in appellant's own case and this Tribunal vide order reported in 2008 (231) E.L.T. 53 (Tri.-Del.) had held that when the goods ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he findings of the lower appellate authority fairly concedes that the decision in the appellant's own case and Geoffery Manners & Co. Ltd. (supra) are against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. 5. After carefully considering the submissions made by both sides, we find that the issue is no longer res integra. Since in the instant case, the goods are not meant for retail sale, the ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
