9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present appeal i.e. from 1-10-96 to 28-2-97, the appellants' various products were transported from I.O.C., Morigram, a registered warehouse for storing non-duty paid stock, to various depots of the appellant company. On payment of duty on the assessable value applicable at I.O.C., Morigram. 2. The above locations are attached to the refineries for their normal supply, but due to scarcity aris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sportation Cost paid by the appellants for removing the goods from Morigram Warehouse to the various depots. 5. The said demand was confirmed by the original adjudicating authority and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 6. We have heard Shri P.K. Das, learned Advocate for the appellant company and Shri N.K. Mishra, learned J.D.R. for the Revenue. 7. The appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not in a position to recover the said Charges from their buyer. The said Charges are borne by the appellant company themselves, in which case there is justification for inclusion of the said Transportation Charges assessable value of the goods. 8. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that such Transportation Charges from Morigram Terminal to different depots are to be included in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Others reported in 2001 (130) E.L.T. 322 (Tri. - LB) = (2000 (36) RLT 611 (CEGAT), has held that different sale prices fixed by the Oil Co-ordination Committee for L.P.G. in bulk or packed for different end-uses, are to be adopted as assessable values. Inasmuch as in the instant case, there is no dispute about the products being governed by the Administrative Price Mechanism, the appellants having ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
