9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods are delivered at the place of buyers charging uniform freight. Once there was clearance of duty-paid goods, any further charges for delivery thereof under separate contract shall not form part of the assessable value. This being the basic principle for levy of excise duty, following the decision of Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in IOCL Vs CCE Kolkata [2007 (5) TMI 476 - CESTAT, KOLKATA], there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No.E/462/2005 - FINAL ORDER No.41562/2016 - Dated:- 21-9-2016 - Shri D.N. Panda, (J) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, (T) Shri S. Muthuvenkatraman, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR), For the Respondent Per D.N. Panda The appellant's grievance is on two counts. The first count is that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al when no further levy of duty is made. Since 'place of removal' was terminal and duty prevalent at that point of time has been charged on the value at that place, there cannot be adoption of price at COCO for levy of duty on the duty-paid goods. He explains that prior to 14.5.2003 and after that, the law relating to 'place of removal' was as under :- Prior to 14-5-2003 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods are removed; Emphasizing the meaning of the term place of removal , it is submitted on behalf of the appellant that COCO was not the 'place of removal'. Therefore by no imagination, the price prevailing at that place shall be the assessable value. 3. Rival contention of Revenue is that the delivery charges not being specific, that shall be liable to duty. So also the 'pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it is noticed that duty-paid goods had moved to the COCO and meaning of place of removal before 14.5.2003 did not cover such transaction within its ambit. Therefore, appellant is correct to place reliance on the Bangalore Bench decision in the case of CCE Visakhapatnam Vs BPCL - 2014 (299) ELT 237 (Tri.-Bang.) . Having been satisfied that, on both counts, there is merit in the case of the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
