TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 951X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OURT] , this Court, while deciding on a similar issue, held that for goods to be included under the assessment of Section 4(A) of the Central excise Act, it must comply with five factors. A bare perusal of Section 4(A) of the Act and the abovementioned judgment would show that to attract a MRP based valuation of goods under the Central Excise Act, the goods should be notified under Section 4(A) of the Act and that such goods must come within the purview of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, which has now been repealed and replaced by the legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 - In the present case at hand, the respondent entered into a sale with the paramilitary and military as per the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ahabad in Order Nos.A/70266- 20267/2019 -EX (DB) in Appeal Nos. E/70445/2017 and E/70618/2017, whereby the Respondent s plea was allowed. FACTS 2. Briefly, the facts relevant for the purpose of these Appeals are as follows : I. The Respondent No.1, M/s AR Polymers Pvt. Ltd. is a manufacturer engaged in the manufacture of footwear and the sale of the same to defense/paramilitary forces in bulk for their use. II. An intelligence was received by the DGCEI that the respondent was availing benefits under notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17/03/12 and Section 4(A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which is limited to footwear sold in retail. The said notification wholly exempts the payment of Central Excise Duty for retail sale of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ementioned notification extends to the Respondent herein. As against this the Appellant herein has filed the present Appeal. ANALYSIS 3. We have heard the counsels appearing on behalf of the Appellant in great detail. We must, however, mention that despite several opportunities being afforded to the Respondent and the counsel for the respondent being served the notice, and the matter being called multiple times, none appeared before this Court. 4. The Respondent, due to the tax assessment being less under Section 4(A) of the Act, is seeking benefit under the same, however, due to the assessment under Section (4) of the Act being more, the Appellant is claiming for the assessment to be done thereunder. This appeal, therefore, f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. A bare perusal of Section 4(A) of the Act and the abovementioned judgment would show that to attract a MRP based valuation of goods under the Central Excise Act, the goods should be notified under Section 4(A) of the Act and that such goods must come within the purview of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, which has now been repealed and replaced by the legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules,2011. 8. In the present case at hand, the respondent entered into a sale with the paramilitary and military as per the terms of agreement signed. While the goods in the impugned sale were notified under Section 4(A) of the Act by way of an official notification in the gazette, what is most relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ler terms, it would mean that for a sale of goods to take assessment benefits under Section 4(A) of the Act, it must be a retail sale, and there must be a mandate of law that directs the seller to affix a retail price on the goods for a sale to be considered a retail sale. 13. It would also mean that a mere affixation of the MRP on a good does not qualify it to claim benefits under Section 4(A) of the Act, and that there must be a requirement for the affixation of such MRP. Therefore, even if there is affixation of MRP in the goods, what must be looked at it is whether such affixation was mandated by law. 14. Apart from the exemption granted by way of Section 3(b) that automatically removes the mandate of law to affix an MRP on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
