TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 414X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndal, P.R. Chandrasekharan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri N.A. Sayyad, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (T)]. The appellant-assessee, M/s. Finolex Cables Ltd., have filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. P-I/291/2003, dated 15-9-2003 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-I. Vide the said order the Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the refund claim of the appellant-assessee of Rs. 5,24,207/-. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as follows : (a) The appellant stock-transfer the goods to their depots from where the sales are effected. While clearing the goods from their factory the appellant dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sold at or about the same time, at the time nearest to the time of removal or goods under assessment. He also relied on the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of MRF Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - 1997 (92) E.L.T. 309 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court had held that fluctuation in prices subsequent to clearances of goods not to affect the liability to excise duty. Accordingly, he held that once goods have been cleared form the factory for transfer to depot on the transaction value prevailing then at the depot, any subsequent change in price due to price revision should not have any effect resulting either in refund or demand. Accordingly, he rejected the refund claim of he appellant and the same was challenged before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prevailing at the depot at time of removal of goods from their factory, any subsequent price revision cannot alter the price on which the duty liability has been discharged. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. In the refund application the appellant had submitted as follows : During the month of March and April, 2001, we had stock transferred the goods from factory to our Branch/Depot on payment of duty. Assessable value was computed on the basis of prevailing price list and duty was paid accordingly. However, we reduced the prices with effect from April 23, 2001. We enclose copies of said price lists for your ready reference. As a result of reduction in price from 23-4-2001, the goods, which were c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he depot should be considered for determination of assessable value and this Tribunal had held that subject to the issue of unjust enrichment the appeal was allowed by way of remand. In the case of Premier Explosives Ltd. referred to supra, relied upon by the appellant, there was a price variation clause between the buyer and the seller in terms of the agreement entered into between them and therefore the Tribunal held that the price being provisional, any reduction in the price later on should be taken into account for determining the final duty liability. Similarly, in the case of Ipca Laboratories Ltd., referred to supra, the decision was given in the context of provisional assessment. In the case of Orient Explosives Ltd. the initial pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
