TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to secure the interests of Revenue does not arise. As regards the duty demand of Rs.3.3 crore in respect of goods where CVD liability was discharged on transaction value basis, there may be some merit in the contention of the revenue that the activity of affixing labels and MRP enhancing the marketability of the products - the appellant would be eligible for Cenvat Credit of CVD paid on the imported goods which is approximately of Rs.1 crore - thus, additional duty liability on account of re-labelling, MRP affixation would be approximately Rs.2.3 crores - the appellant directed to make a pre-deposit of duty of Rs.2.3 crore – upon such submission rest of the duty to be stayed till the disposal – Partial stay granted. - E/85419/13,E/1816 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se goods after clearance by the Customs does not arise at all and the demand of duty of Rs.42 crores (approx). Inasmuch as the goods have been cleared on payment of CVD on MRP basis and no further activities were undertaken after clearance by the customs, the demand of said duty is unsustainable in law. For the period prior to 26/02/2009, the appellant was following a procedure as directed by the customs. From the Customs area, the goods were taken to private godown at Bhiwandi, Dronagiri and the activities of affixing labels, MRPs, etc, were undertaken and the Customs granted permission for these activities to be undertaken outside the Customs area on execution of bond and bank guarantee and accordingly, they carried out these activities. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taining less than 10ml or 10 grams. In respect of first category the duty demand would approximately Rs.8 crore. However, in this case, the position is that the appellant had discharged CVD on MRP basis and there is no difference in MRP which has been adopted for excise duty demands. As regards the goods contained in packages less than 10 ml or 10 gm, in respect of these goods, the CVD duty liability was discharged on transaction value basis. Thereafter the goods were affixed with labels and MRP before marketing them into the domestic tariff area. In respect of these goods there is a value addition during the process and the total duty liability on such goods works out to 3.36crore and the appellant had discharged the CVD liability of appro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rests of Revenue does not arise. As regards the duty demand of Rs.3.3 crore in respect of goods where CVD liability was discharged on transaction value basis, there may be some merit in the contention of the revenue that the activity of affixing labels and MRP enhancing the marketability of the products. However, in this case also, the appellant would be eligible for Cenvat Credit of CVD paid on the imported goods which is approximately of Rs.1 crore. Therefore, additional duty liability on account of re-labelling, MRP affixation would be approximately Rs.2.3 crores. The appellant has pleaded no financial hardship. Therefore, we direct the appellant to make a pre-deposit of duty of Rs.2.3 crore within four weeks and report compliance on 17/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
