1990 (7) TMI 217

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : D.C. Mandal, Member (T)]. - The appellants agitated two issues before the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta. The first issue related to the valuation of the goods manufactured and cleared by them. They were charging different prices from their customers depending on the distance between the customers' premises and the factory. The Deputy Collect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... om the factory or any other premises of manufacture or production for delivery at the place of manufacture or production, or if a wholesale market does not exist for such article at such place, at the nearest place where such market exists." The price approved by the Deputy Collector was the price at which the appellants' goods were capable of being sold at the factory gate. In fact, the said pri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hey were charging different prices from their customers depending on the distance between the factory and the customers' premises was declared in the price lists. Hence, entire demand is time-barred. We observe from the impugned order that the Appellate Collector disposed of the point of limitation stating that the plea of time-bar was irrelevant inasmuch as the order related only to fixation of a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X