1995 (3) TMI 99 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashing of show cause notices, trade notices, and circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs regarding the addition of interest accrued on advances to assessable value.
2. Interpretation of the circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs.
3. Application of the judgment in Metal Box India Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras.
4. Determination of benefit obtained by the assessee on interest-free loan.
5. Quashing of the circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs.
6. Adjudication of the proceedings by the Authority independently of the circular.
7. Disposition of the writ petitions and modification of the show cause notices.

Analysis:

The High Court of Judicature at Madras considered the writ petitions seeking the quashing of show cause notices, trade notices, and a circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The main issue was whether the interest accrued on advances received by the assessees should be added to the assessable value. The Central Board of Excise and Customs had issued a circular stating that the interest should be added without establishing a separate nexus between the deposit and the price, leading to the issuance of show cause notices based on this circular.

In the judgment of Metal Box India Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras, the Supreme Court held that the benefit obtained by the assessee on interest-free loans should be determined, and only that benefit should be added to the price charged. The High Court emphasized the need for the Excise Department to demonstrate the extent of benefit obtained by the assessee on the interest-free loan to determine the assessable value correctly. Consequently, the circular issued by the Board was deemed unsustainable, and the show cause notices based on it were directed to be determined based on the Supreme Court's judgment.

The High Court highlighted the quasi-judicial nature of the adjudicatory proceeding, emphasizing that the Authority must adjudicate independently of the circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. To avoid confusion, the Court decided to quash the circular to ensure an unbiased determination by the Authority.

As a result, the writ petitions were disposed of by quashing the circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The respondents were directed to proceed with the proceedings initiated by the show cause notices and modify them as necessary based on the Supreme Court's judgment. The order of the single Judge was modified accordingly, and the proceedings were to continue as per the judgment. The writ appeal was disposed of without any order as to costs.