TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 282X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d SDR as none appeared on behalf of the appellant. 2. Appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The issue in this appeal is in respect of assessable value of Perlite Powder manufactured by the appellants in terms of Section 4(1) of the Central Excise Act. 3. Appellants claimed the abatement in respect of the cost of packing in durable and r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and returnable bags, therefore, they are entitled for this abatement. 5. The contention of the revenue is that as per the contract for supply of the final product, the customer has to pay Rs. 5/- per bag in case empty bag has not been returned by customer, therefore the cost of packing in durable and returnable bag is only Rs. 5/- and as per the provisions of Section 4(1) of Central Excise Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch excisable goods are not wrapped and contained. In view of this provision, the cost of bag in which excisable goods cleared by the appellant which is durable and returnable in nature is to be excluded from the assessable value of the goods. Therefore, we find no merit in the claim of the appellant. Impugned order is upheld. 7. In respect of transportation charges, the case of revenue is that a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, the demand by including the excess payment received on account of transportation charges towards assessable value of the goods is set aside. 8. The lower authorities also imposed penalty on the firm. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, we reduce the penalty to Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only). Appeal is disposed of as indicated above. (Dictated pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
