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

Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Jaipur

2016 (11) TMI 1345 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Duty under protest - Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules - Sale of sample pack to distributor - Held that: - it appears that an identical issue came up before this Tribunal in the assessee s own case [M/s Bausch and Lomb Eyecare India Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.C.E., Jaipur 2016 (6) TMI 510 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] - wherein it was held that the Revenue's 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 scheme. Revenue has .....

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 present appeal is filed against the order dated 20.10.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Jaipur in Appeal No.214/2008. The period in dispute is from April 2006 to March 2007. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Lens Care Solution falling under Tariff Heading 3307. The appellant sells ReNu lens care solution in 120 ml. bottles at the assessable value of ₹ 87 per bottle and pays duty thereon. 3. During the period .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent of duty on transaction value of Re 1 per bottle contending that the goods were meant to be samples and not sold. Thereafter, appellant started paying excise duty on the sample bottles under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules i.e. cost of production plus 10% under protest. The objection raised by the Department culminated into the issuance of periodical show cause notices. The impugned notices alleged that that the bottles of lens care solution cleared by the appellant were required to be valued b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

., Jaipur 2015 TIOL 1495 CESTAT DEL] where it was observed as under :- 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 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. We note that an identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case 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

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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