TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 633X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut display of any MRP - baby powder fell outside the purview of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act - The duty paid by the assessee in terms of Section 4 is in order. - E/1243/2003 - A/156/2010-WZB/C-II/EB - Dated:- 27-4-2010 - S/Shri P.C. Chacko, Member (J) and S.K. Gaule, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY: Shri K. Lal, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri Naresh Thacker, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per: P.C. Chacko, Member (J)]. - In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the short question arising for consideration is whether the subject goods was assessable to duty of excise in terms of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act as claimed by the assessee or in terms of Section 4A of the Act as claimed by the Revenue. The respondent was c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noted that the Board had clarified in a Circular dated 11-8-97 that, even where the product was printed with MRP though not so required under the above Act, it remained out of the purview of Section 4A and hence would be covered under Section 4 only. After noting that the MRP mentioned on the package in question had been struck out, the appellate authority found the product to have been cleared for sale on non-MRP basis. In the result, the duty paid by the assessee in terms of Section 4 was accepted and the differential duty demand worked out under Section 4A of the Act was set aside. 3. The ld. SDR for the appellant has made an attempt to distinguish the case of Jayanti Food Processing (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Rajasthan - 2007 (215) E.L.T. 327 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssable to duty of excise under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. The decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) was affirmed by this Tribunal in the cited case. It appears, the Tribunal's decision in the case of VVF Ltd., has been accepted by the department. 5. We have also found strong support to the assessee's case from the Apex Court's judgment in Jayanti Foods Processing case. In that case, the Counsel for the assessee had relied on Rule 34(a) of the Standards of Weights Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules and pointed out that the goods in question was completely covered under the said Rule inasmuch as the package specifically declared that it was specially packed for 'Pepsi' who wanted to supply the item as a free gift to ultimate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
