9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... locations across the country, is engaged in the manufacture of lubricating oil and greases classifiable under chapter 2710.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The said goods have been notified under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, for the purpose of MRP valuation. The appellant is discharging payment of central excise duty by valuing the goods on the basis of MRP less prescribed abatement. Show Cause Notice dated 14th January, 2004, was issued to propose demand of differential duty amount by valuing the goods under Section 4 of the Act on the ground that the goods in bulk packs of 210 Ltr and 180 Ltr. were meant for industrial sale and not retail sale and that the bulk packs were not covered by the provisions of the Sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be valued under Section 4A. He submitted that mere non-payment of demanded duty cannot be held as a reason of fraud or suppression so as to justify invocation of extended period of limitation. On merits, he submitted that their case is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. Arvind Footwear Pvt Ltd 2017 (348) ELT 510 (Tri-Mum), wherein it has been held that the goods supplied in bulk for industrial use on which MRP is stated would be valued in terms of Section 4A of the Act, in case the said goods are notified under the said section. He accordingly submitted that since the goods in question (lubricants) have been notified under Section 4A and MRP is required to be affixed on the packages, the valuation has been cor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of Central Excise, Range VIII, Chembur-I Division, Mumbai III Commissionerate, has vide letter dated 22.12.2000 directed the assessee's Mumbai Unit to assess the subject goods under Section 4A instead of Section 4 of the Act. Accordingly, the charge of suppression sought to be levelled against the Chennai unit was set aside by the Ld. Jt. Commissioner, Chennai, taking note of the guidance given by Mumbai Commissionerate. 7. At the stage of the first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Kolkata, the appellant relied on the aforesaid adjudication order passed by the Chennai Commissionerate. In this regard, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has noted that "The appellant has submitted to me during the personal he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
