2023 (3) TMI 437 - SC - Central Excise

Valuation of Specially Denatured Spirits (SDS) - Rejection of the highest rate - respondent-assessee, contended that upon a proper valuation in terms of Rule 6(p)(ii) of the Central Excise Rule, 1994, the value of SDS was determinable on the basis of its in-house production at Kaptanganj - extended period of limitation - penalty - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be faulted. This Court in its judgment reported as AK ROY AND ANOTHER VERSUS VOLTAS LIMITED [1972 (12) TMI 37 - SUPREME COURT] held that No data was placed before the High Court by the appellant to show that the 22 per cent discount did not represent 'trade discount' is a percentage deduction from the regular list or catalogue price of goods. As there was no case for the appellants that there was any secret arrangements between the wholesale dealers and the respondent in respect of the sales to them or that the price of the articles was understated in the agreements or that any extra-commercial advantages to the dealers were taken into account in fixing the price we do not think that we should go into the question whether the discount allowed to the wholesale dealers was 'trade discount' or not for the purpose of the explanation.

In view of the clear principle enunciated by this Court which is that the most conservative price is to be taken into account while determining the value of goods, CESTAT approach and conclusions, in the opinion of this Court cannot be faulted. The impugned order of the CESTAT is accordingly affirmed.

Appeal dismissed.