Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (4) TMI 689

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not question the power of the Central Government under Section 3(2) of the CE Act to fix the tariff value. They also do not question the constitutional validity of Section 3 of the CT Act in terms of which the CVD can be levied and collected. The issue really is only about the apprehension of the petitioners that they may be compelled to disclose the RSP on the packages contrary to the exemption granted under Rule 26 of the LMPC Rules. This apprehension has been laid to rest by the respondents who have clarified that they will not insist on such disclosure of the RSP on the package as long as the petitioners otherwise satisfy the requirement of Rule 26 of the LMPC Rules. What the respondents ask is for a declaration made to them of the RSP at which such commodities are ultimately sold. Therefore, there is no illegality attaching to the impugned Notification. Consequently, the prayer that the said Notification should be held to be contrary the CE Act or the CT Act is hereby rejected. Insofar as it only fixes the tariff value as the RSP which the importer has to declare to the Customs authorities, no illegality attaches to the said Notification or the subsequent clarification issue .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h is imported into India shall, in addition to the regular customs duty, be also liable to a duty equal to the excise duty for the time being leviable on a like article if produced or manufactured in India and if such excise duty on a like article is leviable at any percentage of its value, the additional duty to which the impugned article shall be so liable shall be calculated at that percentage of the value of the imported article. This additional duty is also called as countervailing duty (CVD). For determining the CVD, the excise duty that could be levied and collected on an article if it was produced in India, will have to be ascertained. 5. Section 3(2) of the CE Act provides that the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, fix, for the purpose of levying the excise duty tariff value of any article enumerated, either specifically or under general headings, in the First schedule and the Second Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) as chargeable with duty ad valorem and may alter any tariff values for the time being in force. Further, Section 3(3) of the CE Act talks of the different kinds of tariff value that may be fixed d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herein and includes an imported package; Provided that for the purposes of this Explanation, the expression ultimate consumer shall not include industrial or institutional consumers. 8. By way of a further elucidation of the above Notification, the Tax Research Unit (TRU) of the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance on 2nd January, 2014 issued a communication addressed to the Excise and Customs officials, which reads as under:- Your attention is invited to notification No.16/2013-Central Excise (NT), dated 31.12.2013, prescribing tariff value under section 3(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in respect of goods falling under tariff heading 3304 (beauty or make-up preparations and preparations for the care of the skin, etc.) of the Central Excise Tariff and in respect of which the provisions of section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 do not apply. The tariff value shall be the retail sale price (RSP) less abatement as prescribed for such goods under notification No.49/2008-Central Excise (NT), dated 24.12.2008. Presently, the abatement rate in respect of goods falling under tariff heading 3304 is 35%. Thus, the tariff value under section 3(2) of the CEA, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le Price declared on such goods occurring in the impugned Notification has to be read as not requiring any disclosure or declaration of the RSP on the packages in question subject to their fulfilling the parameters of Rule 26 of the LMPC Rules. It only requires the importer to make a declaration to the Respondents of the RSP at which such goods, in packets of 10gm or 10ml, are to be sold. This has been further confirmed by the communication dated 2nd January, 2014 issued by the TRU which states that the tariff value shall be the RSP prescribed for such goods. Therefore, the RSP referred to in the Notification No. 16/2013 is the RSP disclosed by the importer to the Respondents. It is not denied by the Petitioners that they do have information about the RSP at which the imported goods are ultimately sold to the customer. 13. The Petitioners does not question the power of the Central Government under Section 3(2) of the CE Act to fix the tariff value. They also do not question the constitutional validity of Section 3 of the CT Act in terms of which the CVD can be levied and collected. The issue really is only about the apprehension of the Petitioners that they may be compelled to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates