TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of removal as buyers premises - there is no justification for the appellant to consider the assessable value with inclusion of freight element after the goods were sold/removed from the factory - decided in favor of appellant. Exemption/refund of education/higher education cess paid on the goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant by availing Area Based Exemption - N/N. 56/2002-CE dated 14/11/2002 - Held that:- the question of paying duty on such value addition to be covered by the exemption under Notification 56/2002-CE does not arise - decided against appellant. N/N. 19/2008-CE dated 27.03.2008 and 34/2008-CE dated 10.06.2008 - whether the appellants are entitled to claim refund/self-credit as restricted by these notifications ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . As such, all the appeals which were on this dispute are decided following the ratio of the Apex court, stated above. 3. The second issue is with reference to valuation of excisable goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant. The appellant considered the transaction value for their final products inclusive of outward freight up to the place of delivery of their finished goods. The Revenue held a view that the goods were sold and cleared at the factory gate and the appellant is not liable to include the freight component in the transaction value. Such addition of freight resulted in consideration of refund under Notification 56/2002-CE which was held ineligible to the appellant. On this premise, the Revenue proceeded against the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of. Sub-clause (b)(iii) is very important and makes it clear that a depot, the premises of a consignment agent, or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory are all places of removal. What is important to note is that each of these premises is referable only to the manufacturer and not to the buyer of excisable goods. The depot, or the premises of a consignment agent of the manufacturer are obviously places which are referable only to the manufacturer. Even the expression any other place or premises refers only to a manufacturer s place or premises because such place or premises is stated to be where excisable goods are to be sold . These are the key words of the sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19/2008-CE dated 27.03.2008 and 34/2008-CE dated 10.06.2008, whether the appellants are entitled to claim refund/self-credit as restricted by these notifications or not. After hearing the parties, we find that the notifications in question have been examined by the Hon ble J K High Court in the case of Reckit Benckiser vs. UOI 2011 (269) ELT 194 (J K) , wherein the Hon ble High Court quashed the notifications in question. Therefore, in terms of Notification No. 56/2002-CE dated 14.11.2002, the appellants are entitled to claim refund/ self-credit of duty paid through PLA relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Boistadt India Limited others vide Final Order No. 61350-61411/2018 dated 14.03.2018. 7. To sum up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
