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 →

M/s Saraswati Agro Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE-Chandigarh

2017 (11) TMI 751 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

Valuation - clearance of final product in packets of 25Kg - it was contended by appellant that the duty stands again paid by them on the 5kgs packages and there was no requirement to pay any duty on 25Kgs packings in terms of Section 4A of the Act - Section 4A of the Central Excise Act - Held that: - the Tribunal directions have not been carried out by the adjudicating authority in spirit and no efforts have been made by them to find out to whether 25Kg packages sold to M/s Bayer, required affix .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, Member ( Technical ) Shri. Vikrant Kackaria, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. Tarun Kumar, A.R. for the Respondent ORDER Per : Archana Wadhwa As per facts on record, the appellant is engaged in the manufacturer of pesticides and insecticides falling under Chapter Heading 38.08 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It is seen that appellant were issued a show cause notice dated 16.03.2011 raising demand of duty for the period 2006-2007 to July 2010 and another show caus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ties. 2. The said order was challenged before the Tribunal and vide its Final Order No. A/321/2012-EX(BR) dated 02.03.2012, The Tribunal remanded the matter to the lower authorities to appreciate the appellant s contention that packages of 25kg did not require fixation of MRP in terms of the Provisions of Standards of Weights and Measures Act (packaged commodities) Rules, 1977 and as such there was no requirements for payment of duty. The appellant s contention to the effect that the said 25kgs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ns made by both the sides and have gone through the impugned order of Commissioner. The issue as regards the law is clear that is only those packages which are required to be printed with MRP in terms of Weight and Measure Act read with the Rules, would attract Section 4A assessment. Such the only dispute in the present appeal is as to whether 25Kgs. Packages of insecticides and pesticides cleared by the appellant to a registered dealer can be considered to be retail packing s meant for an ultim .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the said plea does not stand taken note of by the adjudicating authority, discussed by him or any finding arrived at by him. As such, it has to be at this prima facie state, arrived at that such factual contention is correct and does not stand rebutted by the adjudicating authority. If that be so, we are of the view that 25 kgs. Packages sent to the dealer are not retail packages as the Revenue has not come up with any evidence to show that these 25kgs. Packages also go to the market in re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at the matter should be remanded. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the commissioner to examine the above plea of the appellant as regards receiving back of the 25 kgs. Packages from the dealer converting the same into 5 kgs retail packages and clearing the same on payment of duty based upon MRP affixed on the said packages. Limitation plea is being kept open and no findings are being given on the same. The commissioner will reconsider the same in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

kings on which duty on MRP basis has been discharged. The ntoicee enclosed sample copies of invoices on which 25kgs. Packing have been cleared by the Noticee to M/s Bayer Crop Sciences and the subsequent invoices on which the same have been received back from M/s Bayer Crop Sciences and also the copies of co-relatable invoices on which the goods were subsequently cleared in smaller packing to show that the duty on those goods had been paid under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. The Noticee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gs were repacked by the Noticee in smaller packings on which duty on MRP basis already stands paid then no differential duty could be held demandable in view of the specific finding of the Tribunal. 3. The case was heard on 29.11.2012 when Shri Vikrant Kackaria, Advocate attended the hearing and filed detailed submissions dated 27.11.2012 along with sample copies of sale invoices, invoices covering the return goods for repacking and furthers the clearances of goods under MRP. He also contested t .....

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 filed additional submissions dated 10.12.2012 alongwith documents in case of show cause notice dated 19.07.2011. 4. In view of the said evidence produced by the appellant on record, it was contended by him that the duty stands again paid by them on the 5kgs packages and there was no requirement to pay any duty on 25Kgs packings in terms of Section 4A of the Act. 5. On going through the finding portion of Commissioner, we note that he has denied the benefit to the appellant and has against up .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sing 25Kgs. Packages for repacking and marketing the same but I find that no such activity is undertaken by M/s Bayer Crop Science in respect of the impugned goods. M/s Bayer Crop Science did not use the contents of impugned 25 Kgs. Packages in the production or manufacturing process and as such, M/s Bayer Crop Science does not fall within the definition of Industrial Consumer , as the said company was admittedly involved in trading and did not put the goods to industrial use and further the pac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

etail sale and are meant for consumption by the ultimate consumer. It is observed that the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Ropar vide letter C.No. IV(16)Adjudication/Tech/RPR/09/10/1136 dated 26.03.2013 has informed that after issuances of two show cause notices up to December, 2010 for recovery of differential duty in terms of Section 4A, the Noticee w.e.f January, 2011 onward has resorted to valuation of the impugned goods under Section 4A of the Act. I therefore, find that 25 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat the such packages were not retail pack as they were being supplied to another industrial consumer M/s Bayer Crop Sciences. Further, the direction of the Tribunal requiring the adjudicating authority to verify as to whether the same 25 kgs packages were being returned to the assessee and are being re-packed by them in 5 kg packages and were being cleared on payment of duty under Section 4A of the Act , do not stand followed. 6. As regards, the observation of the appellate authority that subse .....

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