TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention that the ratio of Amrit Agro Industries Ltd [2007 (3) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. would apply to the fact of the present case, from the records, it is evident that in the purchase orders and invoices were raised, the appellant had indicated that the price charged is inclusive of all taxes. If that be so, the price charged has to be taken as cum tax and the benefit of Section 4 (4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amely, furniture which were sold by them to the customers sometimes assembling them at the site of the customers. In the sales documents it was indicated that the amount charged was inclusive of all taxes. However, the appellant did not get registered with the department nor did they pay any excise duty liability. The case as adjudicated and the duty demands were confirmed holding that the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice relying on the Hon ble Supreme Court s judgement in the case of CE Delhi Vs. Maruti Udyog Ltd., - 2002 (141) ELT 3 (SC). The department has sought review and reconsideration of the said judgement and vide order dated 26/02/2002, the Hon ble Supreme Court in C.A Nos.5862-63/99 has admitted the review petition filed by the department. Accordingly, the judgement in the case of M/s. Srichakra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion of duty element from the price will not arise for determination of value under Section 4 (4) (d) (ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and therefore, in the present case inasmuch as the appellant has not registered himself with the department nor discharged duty liability, the benefit of cum-duty price would not be available. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the respondent reiterates the findings of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
