Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s India Pesticides Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Lucknow

2016 (2) TMI 364 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Valuation - Royalty to be included in assessable value - Held that:- As observed that the appellant have not produced evidence for payment of royalty to M/s Rohne-Poulenc Agrochemicals (India) Ltd., which needs to be considered by the adjudicating authority. Accordingly, it was held that the royalty is deductible and is not to be included in the assessable value if the appellant have paid royalty to M/s Rohne-Poulenc Agrochemicals (India) Ltd. And matter was remanded for verification of such pay .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of finding of any clandestine removal or activity on the part of the appellant. Moreover the stock of the day was taken on estimate basis. - Decided in favour of the appellant. - Appeal No. E/3861/2006 - Dated:- 13-10-2015 - Anil Choudhary, Member (J) And Raju, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri Kapil Vaish, CA For the Respondent : Shri M K Mall, AC (AR) ORDER Per Anil Choudhary The appellant, M/s India Pesticides Ltd., is a manufacturer of technical grade pesticides having their factory at I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

44/-. Also the shortages of 37.5 kg in stock of semi-finished goods valued at ₹ 1646/- involving duty of ₹ 267/- was found. As detailed in Annexure-A to the show-cause notice. In stock verification of modvatable raw material, some shortages were detected as compared to the record in RG-23A Part-I. The shortage was valued at ₹ 5202/- involved credit of ₹ 835/-, which appeared to liable to be reversed. Further inspection was made at Head Office of the appellant at Lucknow o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ation in terms of money collected from buyers towards sale of product and should form part of the assessable value. Based on the above investigation, the statement of Mr. Gupta was recorded, who stated that they supply Sevidol to these buyers and these supplies are generally made through their branch office at Ludhiana and some time directly from the factory at Lucknow. He admitted the collection @ ₹ 3 per kg as mentioned herein above. Mr. Gupta further mentioned that sevidol is a brand na .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellant was required to show cause as to why the seized goods 1579 kgs of pesticides and formulation (excess stock) valued at ₹ 2,18,244/- should not be confiscated involving excise duty of ₹ 34,290/- and further why not Central Excise duty of ₹ 267/- involved in 37.5 kgs pesticide found short should not be recovered and further ₹ 835/- attributable to shortage in modvatable raw material should not be recovered and further why not excess duty of ₹ 82,934/- be r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of ₹ 267/- involved on 37.5 kg of pesticide found short was also confirmed and appropriated as the appellant had already debited the amount during investigation. So far recovery of ₹ 835/- on modvatable raw material, it was observed that no further action is required as the appellant is not contesting and debited the amount before issue of show-cause notice. Amount of ₹ 42,318.40 was confirmed as duty on the amount of royalty for the year 1999-00 and ₹ 40,615.20 on the fr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

royalty is concerned, it was observed that the appellant have not produced evidence for payment of royalty to M/s Rohne-Poulenc Agrochemicals (India) Ltd., which needs to be considered by the adjudicating authority. Accordingly, it was held that the royalty is deductible and is not to be included in the assessable value if the appellant have paid royalty to M/s Rohne-Poulenc Agrochemicals (India) Ltd. And matter was remanded for verification of such payment to the adjudicating authority. 2.5 So .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

valued at ₹ 2,18,244/-. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant states that during the period in question, Depot was included as place of removal. As such, the cost of freight from factory to the depot is allowable deductions from the assessable value. The learned Counsel relies on the ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of VIP Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise - 2003 (155) ELT 8 (SC) where in similar facts and circumstances, it was held that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eight in the price of the goods and sells goods all over the country at a uniform price. In view of the amendment w.e.f. 28.9.1996 under Section 4 of the Act, Revenue wanted to include the freight expenses in the assessable value for transport of goods from factory to depot, which was held as bad by the Apex Court holding that amendment to Section 4 of the Act have made no difference of earlier position as settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Bombay Tyre Int .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version