9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Commissioner (A.R.) for Respondent ORDER Per Ramesh Nair The dispute involved in the present case is quantification of percentage of average freight to be deducted from the assessable value of the excisable goods manufactured and supplied by the appellant. On principle there is no dispute between the appellant and the department that average freight is deductible from the assessable value. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the average freight to be calculated. In the present case the total freight of the financial year which comes to 1.95%. The adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals) have only taken out of the total freight only lowest rate which is not correct. As the average freight for a particular year cannot be arrived at correctly, unless the total freight of the year is taken against the total value ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2016-TIOL-2567-CESTAT-MUM] (viii) M/s Jonas Woodhead and Sons India Ltd. Vs. CCE [2015-TIOL-1848-CESTAT-MAD] (ix) CCE Vs. BSL Ltd. - 2014-TIOL-1410-CESTAT-DEL 3. On the other hand Shri H.M. Dixit, Learned Assistant Commissioner (Authorised Representative) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accountant taken actual annual turnover and total insurance freight during the year and accordingly arrived at the percentage of freight i.e. 1.95%. We find that the Chartered Accountant certificate is absolutely correct and we have no hesitation in discarding the method adopted by the Revenue by taking the lowest freight and insurance. The adjudicating authority may re-quantify the duty amount by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
