9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me as each sachet contains pre-determined quantity of the liquid by weight as well as by volume. The valuation done by the appellant under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is correct. Therefore the demand made by the department under section 4A therefore cannot sustain - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 (198) ELT 565 (Tri. Mum.) c. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot Vs. Makson Confectionary Pvt. Ltd. - 2010 (259) ELT 5 (SC). She also relied upon the Board Circular No. 625/16/2002-CX dated 28.2.2002 particularly para 6 to argue that the Board has clarified that when assessee is not required to affix the MRP on the goods, the assessment has to be done under section 4 and not under section 4A of the Act. 3. The ld. AR Ms. K. Komathi supported the findings in the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides. 5. After hearing both sides we find that the goods in question itself is not required to affix MRP as per Rule 34(b) of Legal Metrology Act / Rules. The Tribunal in the case of Sarvotham Care Ltd. (supra) had analysed a similar issue an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght of all pieces to be taken into consideration to consider the applicability of the exemption under Rule 34. (f) If the total weight of a multi-piece retail package is more than 20 grams, the exemption under Rule 34 would not be applicable and consequently, MRP based valuation under Section 4A would apply. (g) The exemption under Rule 34 (b) of the Rules will be available in respect of a multi-piece retail package if the total weight of all the pieces in the package does not exceed the prescribed limit as held by Krafttech Products (supra) and Urison (supra). (h) Merely because goods in the form of liquid packed in pouches/ sachets are sold in numbers, it would not be that they are not sold by weight or volume, when each pouch/sache ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is the contention of the appellants that for the purpose of CVD on the imported goods, transaction value as per Sec. 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 should be taken as assessable value and it done on the basis of Sec. 4A of the Act as lipsticks weighing 2.2 gms a pc is not subject to the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976. Both the lower authorities did not accept the contention of the appellants and asked to make the payment of differential duty on the basis of the MRP. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before us. 3. Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that identical issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Pidilite Industries Ltd. wherein Fevistick/Gluestick or Prime Stick having wei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
