Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 1159 - SUPREME COURT

2015 (12) TMI 1159 - SUPREME COURT - 2015 (326) E.L.T. 422 (SC) - Transaction value u/s 4 or MRP based Valuation u/s 4A - sale of footwear to various buyers in retail as well as to various institutional buyers in bulk - Held that:- CESTAT had recorded specific findings to the effect that the shoes in question which were supplied in packages to the aforesaid customers had MRP affixed on them. It was further found that clearances were not under Rule 34 of the Rules which exempts supplies of materi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

no more res integra and has been elaborately dealt with by this Court in 'Jayanti Food Processing (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajasthan' [2007 (8) TMI 3 - Supreme Court] - There is no error in the judgment of the CESTAT - Decision in favour of assessee. - Civil Appeal Nos. 999-1001/2008 - Dated:- 19-11-2015 - MR. A.K. SIKRI And MR. ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, JJ For the Petitioner : Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv., Ms. Shirin Khajuria, Adv., Mr. V. Balaji, Adv., Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the basis of MRP after availing abatement of 40% as provided under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') on both type of transactions irrespective of the fact whether the goods are sold to retail buyers or to institutional buyers on contract price. According to the Revenue, respondent herein, by clearing the footwear (finished goods) to their institutional buyers by assessing their value under Section 4A of the Act, had tried to evade central exci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d price, shall be governed by section 4 of the Act and not under Section 4A. The Revenue further relied upon few provisions under the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules') which, according to them, specifies that retail sale price has to be declared only in case the goods are intended for retail sale and not otherwise. The goods sold to institutional buyers at the contract price are not meant for retail sale. Such goods .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

buyers. The Revenue also relied upon the CBEC circular dated 31.07.1998 wherein it was stated that in case a manufacturer voluntarily affixes MRP, which is not statutorily required, then the central excise duty on goods in such packages shall not be charged on the basis of Section 4A of the Act. Revenue further relied upon another Boards's circular dated 28.08.2002 wherein it was stated that Section 4A of the Act is applicable in respect of those cases only where the manufacturer is legally .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al dated 30.03.2006 confirmed a demand of ₹ 32,39,857/- towards excise duty paid and ordered for recovery of the balance amount of ₹ 28,46,756/- under Section 11A of the Act, along with interest as applicable under Section 11AB of the Act. Penalty of equal amount was also imposed upon the respondent-assessee under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, read with Section 11AC of the Act. On appeal, learned Commissioner vide its Order-in-Appeal dated 29.11.2006 and 30.11.2006 set a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the respondent-assessee, had recorded specific findings to the effect that the shoes in question which were supplied in packages to the aforesaid customers had MRP affixed on them. It was further found that clearances were not under Rule 34 of the Rules which exempts supplies of materials in bulk from the operation of Weights and Measures Act, meaning thereby it was obligatory and essential on the part of the respondent to affix MRP on the goods supplied. It is also a matter of record that footw .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Central Excise, Rajasthan' [2007 (8) SCC 34] in the following terms: - 32. It is true that if the unamended section is to be made applicable, the ice cream pack of four litres would certainly be covered under Section 2-A. However, Rule 3 explains that provisions of Chapter II would apply to packages intended for retail sale and expression package wherever it occurs in the Chapter shall be construed accordingly. It is, therefore, clear that the package which was sold by the assessee could no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntities. Then Rule 29 would apply to such package which does not require the price to be displayed on the package. What is required to be stated in (a) name and address of the manufacturer, (b) identity of commodity, and (c) total number of retail packages or net quantity. Shri Ravinder Narain is quite justified in relying on Rule 2(x) and Rule 2(q) (sic 29). The Tribunal does not refer to these vital Rules. 34. There is one more substantial reason supporting the appellant. Shri Ravinder Narain .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version