TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 800X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n decided by the Tribunal that Government's SLP to Hon'ble Supreme Court, against this judgment of the Tribunal has been dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court [ 2010 (7) TMI 845 - SUPREME COURT ] that since what had been cleared from the factory was the paper reels and the duty had been paid on the paper reels at the price of paper reels prevailing at the depot at the time of removal, there is no question of addition of the expenses of freight, insurance and handling incurred in sending the cut paper from the cutting centres to depot and that in view of this, there is no infirmity in the impugned order - Since, the price of paper reels at the depot at the time of removal was available and the duty had been paid only on that pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... luded in the assessable value. It is on this basis that (a) Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original No. 101/AC/YNR/03 dated 13/9/03 and ; (b) Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Panchkula vide order-in-original No. 8 9/ADC/PCK/2004 dated 6/3/04, confirmed duty demands of Rs. 62,998/- and Rs. 15,08,526/- respectively alongwith interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and imposed penalties of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 15,08,526/- respectively on the respondent. The duty demands were confirmed on the grounds that the charges for handling at Depot and freight and insurance from the cutting centre to the depot had not been included in the value on which the duty had been paid at the time of clearance and that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upreme Court in the case of Prabhat Zarda Factory Limited vs. CCE (supra) the expenses incurred up to the depot are to be included in the assessable value, and that the impugned order setting aside the orders-in-original passed by the original Adjudicating Authority is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Prabhat Zarda Factory Limited vs. CCE (supra). 2.2 Shri B.L. Narasimhan, Advocate and Shri Hemant Bajaj, Advocate, the learned Counsels for the respondent, defending the impugned order pleaded that what had been cleared from the factory was paper reels and the same after being cut into sheets at the cutting centres had been sold from the depot, that duty had been paid on the paper reels at the time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the cutting centres ; or (b) cleared to depots from where it is sold to customers. (c) Cleared to depots from where they are sold as reels to customers. Cut paper is cleared to, - D. customers directly from the factory; or E. to depots from where it is sold to customers. 16. The present proceedings cover the case B(b) above. Hence the entire case has to be understood only in respect of clearances of B (b) above. 5. Thus, the dispute in this case is only in respect of the paper reels cleared from the factory to the cutting centres for cutting them into sheets which are thereafter cleared sent to depot from where the same are sold to the customers. As mentioned in para 19 of the Additional Commissioner s orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Apex Court also held that if only the plain glass bottles are cleared from the factory and printing/decoration is done outside, duty would be chargeable only on value of the plain glass bottles and printing/decoration charges would not be includible. Thus the ratio of this judgment of the Apex Court is that when the duty on any goods is on ad-valorem basis, the value of the goods adopted has to be the value of the goods in the form in which the same had been cleared at the time of removal. In this case while what had been cleared from the factory was the paper reels, the Revenue is comparing the value of the paper reels with the selling price of the cut paper at the depot which is not correct. Since, the price of paper reels at the depo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
