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

2016 (6) TMI 510 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (6) TMI 510 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (338) E.L.T. 297 (Tri. - Del.) - Determination of Assessable value - Valuation - excise duty on the sample bottles under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules - whether the value of Re. 1/- adopted by the appellant in respect of the small bottles of 60 ml of Lens Care Solution is the correct assessable or the value has to be raised, by adopting the value of the full commercial bottle of 120 ml - appellants contending that the bottles of Lens Care Solution clear .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tributors, the price at which the same were being sold represents the transaction value and is required to be adopted as the assessable value in terms of the provisions of Section 4. We further find that on appeal against the said decision by the Revenue, the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Ex. & Cus, Surat Versus Sun Pharmaceuticals Inds. Ltd. (2015 (12) TMI 670 - SUPREME COURT ) observed that in the absence of any allegation made by the Revenue that the price at wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g reason. The transaction is between the assessee and their distributors at the price charged by the assessee from the distributors and what the distributors ultimately did with these goods is extraneous and cannot be the relevant consideration to determine the valuation of the excisable goods. - In the present case also, we find that the Revenues entire case for enhancement of the price is based upon the fact that the distributors were giving the said packs free of cost, as a promotional s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(TECHNICAL) For the Petitioner : Shri B.L. Narsimhan, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R.K. Mishra, DR ORDER PER: ARCHANA WADHWA M/s. Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. SP-810-811-A, RIICO Industrial Area, Bhiwadi (hereinafter referred to as the appellants) are engaged in the manufacture of Lens Care Solution falling under Tariff Item No. 3307 9020 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants clear the final products manufactured by them on payment of 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

tributing these goods as a free sample to the customers to promote its own sales. 3. The distributor was giving the samples of 60 ml bottle as a part of Welcome Kit where the Welcome Kit also comprised of lens case & instruction kit and the Welcome Kit was given along with trial lenses to the customer. These activities were undertaken by the dealer for the purpose of sales promotion. The Distributor was not charging any consideration for the samples supplied by it to the customers along with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r for his sales promotion. 5. The departmental authorities objected to the payment of excise duty based on Re. 1/- in respect of 60 ml pack of Lens Care Solution. The appellants started paying excise duty on the sample bottles under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules, i.e., cost of production plus 10% under protest. In this regard, the appellants wrote a letter dated 30th August, 2005 to the Excise Department. The appellants also wrote letter dated 29th September, 2005 to the Excise Department vide w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be valued based on the price of comparable goods, i.e., half of the price of 120 ml bottles meant for retail sale. The show cause notice adopted ₹ 43.50 per pack as the assessable value of 60 ml Lens Care Solution and demanded excise duty of ₹ 25,67,845/- for the period February, 2005 to July 2005. Show cause notice proposed to appropriate excise duty of ₹ 16,34,844/- already deposited by the Appellants. The show cause notice also proposed for recovery of interest as also impos .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se, Jaipur-I, the appellants filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur. 9. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) has passed the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 27.09.2006 vide which he has rejected the appeal filed by the appellants. Hence the present appeal. 10. After hearing both the sides, we find that short question required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the value of Re. 1/- adopted by the appellant in respect of the small bottle .....

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