Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 857 - CESTAT CHENNAILevy of duty - delivery charges - delivery charges collected from the buyers whether shall be liable to duty? - Held that: - The retail distribution system of petroleum company has not been disputed by Revenue. It is the policy of the Government that the duty-paid goods are delivered at the place of buyers charging uniform freight. Once there was clearance of duty-paid goods, any further charges for delivery thereof under separate contract shall not form part of the assessable value. This being the basic principle for levy of excise duty, following the decision of Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in IOCL Vs CCE Kolkata [2007 (5) TMI 476 - CESTAT, KOLKATA], there shall be no levy on this count. The second count of demand is that when duty-paid goods are cleared from terminal to the Company-Owned Company-Outlets (COCO), that was not the place of removal when no further levy of duty is made. Since 'place of removal' was terminal and duty prevalent at that point of time has been charged on the value at that place, there cannot be adoption of price at COCO for levy of duty on the duty-paid goods - Held that: - it is noticed that duty-paid goods had moved to the COCO and meaning of "place of removal" before 14.5.2003 did not cover such transaction within its ambit. Therefore, appellant is correct to place reliance on the Bangalore Bench decision in the case of CCE Visakhapatnam Vs BPCL [2012 (12) TMI 471 - CESTAT, Bangalore]. Levy of duty not justified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|