9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rence between the price claimed as assessable value and the wholesale price at which they were sold by the buyers in wholesale and that the appellants had suppressed the above facts from the Department, namely that their buyers had incurred further expenses for the distribution, marketing, etc for these products - since the revenue failed to substantiate the case and provide evidences - appeal of the assessee allowed - E/1960/2006 - A/751/2008-WZB/C-II/(EB) - Dated:- 13-8-2008 - Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President and Shri A.K. Srivastava, Member (T) S/Shri E.P. Bharucha, Sr. Advocate with M.P. Baxi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri P.M. Govande, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: A.K. Srivastava, Member (T)]. - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d been incurred by the said buyers and that these expenses would have otherwise formed part of the assessable value, had the appellants (brand owner) directly engaged themselves in the marketing of the said product. it was further alleged that there was a wide difference between the price claimed as assessable value and the wholesale price at which they were sold by the buyers in wholesale and that the appellants had suppressed the above facts from the Department, namely that their buyers had incurred further expenses for the distribution, marketing, etc for these products. Duty amounting to Rs. 5,61,58,199/- and educational cess of Rs. 98,897/- were, therefore, proposed to be demanded from the appellants by invoking the proviso to Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of Price of Excisable Goods) Valuation Rules, 2000 are applicable to the facts of the appellants' case by producing evidence in this behalf, which has not been done. 8. We also note that the Commissioner, in his findings, has held that the transactions between the appellants and the buyers were governed by the provisions of Section 4(1)(a)of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and that these were on principal to principal basis. In that event if the said buyers were to incur any expenditure whatsoever after purchasing the said medicaments from the appellants on their own account, to further their own sales, it cannot be held that these expenses had been incurred on behalf of the appellants. It is trite law that it is for the Revenue to subst ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is customary to pin point an exact quantum of duty liability in the show cause notice yet he does not think that it would be great short coming of the notice so long as the ways and means of working of the differential value is evident from the notice itself, that is to say, the transaction value has been arrived at by deducting element of duties and taxes from the MRP. We are not inclined to agree with these observations of the Commissioner. It is indeed a great shortcoming not to pin point the exact quantum of duty liability in the show cause notice. It is fundamental that a show cause notice is required to be extremely exact in making specific and cogent allegations, in pinpointing and producing cogent evidence, in support thereof, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
