9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (6) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, which are in the nature of additional consideration from its customers and, therefore, liable to be included in the assessable value in terms of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The adjudicating authorities confirmed the demands and imposed penalties (only in cases at Sr. Nos. 1 to 8 above). Hence, these appeals. 2. It is felt that the law is very much clear on the issue in question and as it is in favour of the appellants, I do not find it necessary to grant personal hearing to the above listed appellants. 3. In the subject cases, the appellants received the advances/deposits from their customers to ensure that the goods, which are manufactured as per the specifications of the customers, are accepted and delivery taken without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (S.C.)] and the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Union of India v. Laxmi Machine Works, 1995 (77) E.L.T. 799 (Madras) have been issued recently vide its Circular No. 404/37/98-CX., dated 22-6-1998, wherein it has been clarified that if there is no nexus between the security deposits/advances made by the wholesale buyer, and the sale price of the excisable goods, or if the Department is not in a position to determine the value of additional consideration, the provisions of Rule 5 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 [provisions of Rule 6 of Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000] would not be applicable. It was further clarified that normally, where the same price is charged from buyers who have given the deposit and from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for will be accepted by the buyer. Thus, these cases cannot be equated to the Metal Box case [1995 (75) E.L.T. 446 (S.C.)], which applied to goods produced in large quantities under an agreement and in respect of which a normal price was available, and are not specifically tailor made for which interest free advances of huge amounts were provided. As per the decision of Laxmi Machine case and as per the Board's letter referred to above what is needed is to establish if (a) nexus between advances obtained and the price offered for sale, and (b) the benefit is quantifiable in terms of reduction from the normal wholesale price existing for same or similar goods, or by reasons of other evidences of direct or indirect financial advantages gain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re various latest decisions on the issue holding that notional interest on the advance payment of price by the buyers are not includible in the assessable value. (i) Moosa Haji Patrawala Pvt. Ltd. - 2001 (138) E.L.T. 290 (T). Notional interest on the advance payment of price by the buyer not includible in the assessable value - Reasons that but for these advances, the manufacturer would have resorted to commercial borrowing and that goods being tailor made, are too remote to establish the nexus between the fact of advance and reduction in price. (ii) Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. v. CCE - 2001 (133) E.L.T. 584 (T). (iii) Rajendra Mechanical v. CCE, Mumbai-III - 2002 (101) ECR 347 (T). The ratio of these decisions are fully applicable e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
