9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tect customers from being overcharged at the retail stage on pain of penalties and detriments prescribed. Neither that law nor Central Excise Act, 1944 affords a mandate to customs officials, at the time of clearance of import, or central excise officials, at the time of clearance from factory, to determine the price at which the goods are sold - exclusively a decision of the manufacturer/importer. The goods imported by the appellant are repacked after clearance from customs control and such activity being manufacture erases the import that had taken place earlier to be superimposed with production of excisable goods in the hands of the manufacturer and subject to valuation under section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 for assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -packed for further sale after being subject to quality check. These goods covered by the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976/ Legal Metrology Act, 2009 were required to be affixed with labels indicating the maximum retail selling price (RSP) both at the time of import and on clearance after manufacture in the country. Consequently, after import of goods by appellant, and clearance on payment of duties of customs including additional duty on the declared retail selling price (RSP) , the appellant undertakes deemed manufacture by checks and repacking to render the goods excisable. 3. Insofar as the imports after 18th March 2010 were concerned, the appellant, on instructions from customs officials, had been discharging additi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals), Mumbai-II holding that 4.6 The appellants are industrial consumers. Therefore, even if the appellants declare MRP at the time of importation, MRP declared thereon should be ignored for the purpose of Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and rules made thereunder. Therefore, the MRP declared at the time of importation cannot be considered as MRP of the goods imported. Hence, in law, the appellants have declared MRP only once i.e., when the goods were cleared from the Panvel warehouse. 4.7 For the subsequent period August 2012 to March 2013, a show cause notice dated 22.8.2013 was issued to the appellant, on the very same allegations. This show cause notice was adjudicated vide order dated 27.8.2014 and dropped the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale price; From the plain reading of the explanations. above, it is clear that the higher MRP is to be considered only when more than one MRP are affixed on the package of the articles. The SCN nowhere alleges that the impugned articles had two MRP on their packages at the time of clearance from their Panvel warehouse. The SCN only alleges that the MRP declared on the Bills of Entry at the time of importation of these articles was higher than that declared on the packages at the time of clearance from their Panvel warehouse. In this regard, I find that the said explanation nowhere makes any mention of the MRP declared on the bill of entry or any documents. The explanation only clarifies that if any package bears more than one MRP, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eration of MRP or mentioning of more than one MRP, it talks about such alteration or mention of MRP on the package of the goods and not alteration or mention of MRP on any document. From this it is very clear to me that the Central Excise Duty is leviable on the goods falling under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with respect to the MRP declared on the packages at the time of their clearance from the factory and not with respect to that declared on the bill of entry at the time of their importation. I find that since the noticee has paid the Central Excise Duty on the basis of MRP declared on the package of the goods at the time of their removal from Panvel warehouse, they are not liable to pay any differential duty. In view of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e those sold at a higher price subsequently. The goods imported by the appellant are repacked after clearance from customs control and such activity being manufacture erases the import that had taken place earlier to be superimposed with production of excisable goods in the hands of the manufacturer and subject to valuation under section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 for assessment to duties of central excise. The affixing of retail selling price (RSP) thereupon becomes the first, and final, declaration of price for assessment under Central Excise Act, 1944. There are, thus, no two prices and, therefore, the Explanation 2(a) below section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 would not come into play. In the case of the appellant for the ea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
