TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (4) TMI 31
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue is before us on remand by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under judgment in the case of Proctor & Gamble Hygiene & Health Care Ltd. Vs. CCE Bhopal -2005 (71) RLT 606 (SC) =2005 (190) ELT 289 (SC). 2. The appellant manufactures the aforesaid detergent in its factory near Mandideep near Bhopal, clears it in 25 Kg. (bulk) pac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as short levy of duty since the value was required to be correctly fixed by taking into account the sale price of the retail packs. Rule 6 (b) (ii) of Central Excise Valuation Rules was relied on for the valuation. This valuation and the differential duty demand consequently made are being challenged in the present appeal. 4. The appellant is challenging the order both on merits as well as on lim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt in the case Sidhartha Tubes Ltd. [reported in 2006 (72) RLT 1(SC)) in support of contention that the goods are to be assessed and cleared based on their condition at the time of their removal from the factory of manufacture and post clearance processes cannot be taken into account. 5. The contention of the Ld. SDR is that, under the impugned order, also detergent is being assessed based on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s settled by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Savita Chemicals and that decision has attained finality. 7. With regard to limitation, it is being pointed out by the appellant that from 1990 onwards, the appellant had been having the same practice with regard to the detergent in question and all through the assessment was being claimed and approved based on the cost of production of th....