TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of delivery to places within the radius of 39 K.Ms. from the storage deport and at the rate of ₹ 1.2 per K.L. per K.M to other places. When the delivery charges are separately mentioned in the invoices just because the same have been charged at an equalized rate, their deduction cannot be disallowed. The impugned order, therefore, is not correct and as such the appellant have prima-facie case in their favour. The requirement of pre-deposit of the duty demand, interest and penalty is, therefore, waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof is stayed during pendency of the appeal - Stay granted. - Excise Stay Application No.E/S/54210/2014 in Excise Appeal No.E/53774/2014-EX[DB] - Stay Order No. 50620/2015 - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Appeal dated 15.04.2014 upheld the Additional Commissioner s order. Against this order these appeals have been filed along with stay applications. 2. Heard both the sides in respect of stay application. 3. Shri Tarun Gulati, Advocate, the ld. Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that during the period of dispute since retail price of the various petroleum products such as motor spirit, HSD etc. was fixed by the Government, the appellant were charging the delivery charges at the rates fixed by Oil Co-ordination Committee at an equalised rate, that the actual delivery charge being incurred were more than the delivery charges being recovered from the dealers, that the delivery charges at equalized rate of ₹ 44 per K.L. (within 39 K ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nductors vs. CCE, Indore reported in 2013 (298) ELT 565 (Tri. Del.) has held that even during period w.e.f. 01.07.2000, the freight charged on equalized basis was not includible in the assessable value, that in view of this, the impugned order is not correct that the appellant have strong prima-facie case in their favour and hence the requirement of pre-deposit of the duty demand, interest and penalty may be waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof may be stayed. 4. Shri Ranjan Khanna, the learned D.R, opposed the stay application by reiterating the findings of the impugned order and pleaded that in terms of the provisions of Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, as the same existed during the period of dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
