9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant is a manufacture of sugar chargeable to Central Excise duty. The period of dispute in this case is from March, 1996 to August, 1996. During this period, the appellant cleared 67,585.658 tones of molasses to various buyers at the price of Rs. 10 per metric tonne and paid duty on that price. The departments allegation is that the prevailing price of the molasses during that period was Rs. 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s who exercises complete control over the production, storage and sale price of the molasses; that the molasses sold by the appellant was of second quality and the same was sold by them on fully commercial basis and the sale of molasses at the price of Rs. 10 per MT had been intimated to the State Excise Commissioner, but this plea was not accepted. 2. On appeal being filed to the Commissioner (a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tonne. He also pleaded that the appellant did not produce any evidence regarding the molasses sold being of second quality. He therefore, pleaded that there is no infirmity with the impugned order. 5. We have considered the submissions of the DR and have gone through the record of this case. 6. The basis of duty demand is that when the prevailing price of the molasses was at Rs. 100 per metric t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not only consideration for sale. In this case, there is neither allegation nor there is any evidence that the sale of the molasses was not to independent buyers and that the price was not the sole consideration of sale. When it is not disputed that the sale was to independent buyers and price was the only consideration for sale and was not influenced by any other consideration, in our view, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
