TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis on which ROC is computed. There is nothing to indicate as to when ROC became chargeable. There is nothing to indicate the rate at which ROC was chargeable. There is nothing to indicate whether the amount of ROC was at all reflected in the invoices. Similarly, on the question of equalized freight, we find that the assessee had sold a part of its goods to independent dealers ex-factory and the rest of its goods were sold to its depot/branches. In this connection, it may be noted that 25% of the total sales was to independent buyers. In other words, the goods were partly sold at the factory gate and partly from the depot. The assessee has not led evidence to justify the extent of the claim for deduction on account of actual freight. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e filed a declaration of assessable value under Rule 173C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in respect of aforestated brands of aerated water effective from 1-4-1994. In this declaration, the assessee claimed deduction from depot sale price on account of equalized freight and on account of ROC on durable and returnable containers i.e. glass bottle packing of 1000 ml. and 500 ml. of the aforestated brands of aerated water. 3.The department found that the abatement claimed on account of freight in the price declaration was on the higher side as compared to what was claimed in the price list submitted in March, 1994. Hence, the Assistant Commissioner ordered provisional assessment of the aforestated price-declaration filed by the assessee. U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice charged by the assessee at the factory gate should be treated as the assessable value under Section 4 of the said Act. 5.Aggrieved by the aforestated decision on ROC and on equalized freight, the department carried the matter in appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad, who took the view that although ROC was admissible as held by this Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Indian Oxygen Ltd. reported in 1988 (36) E.L.T. 730, the burden was on the assessee to provide records/data and certificates to justify the extent of deduction claimed by the assessee for ROC and for equalized freight. According to the appellate authority, the assessee had failed to provide the requisite data justifying the extent of deduction o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for ROC, the assessee has not produced the requisite data indicating the basis on which ROC is computed. There is nothing to indicate as to when ROC became chargeable. There is nothing to indicate the rate at which ROC was chargeable. There is nothing to indicate whether the amount of ROC was at all reflected in the invoices. 8.Similarly, on the question of equalized freight, we find that the assessee had sold a part of its goods to independent dealers ex-factory and the rest of its goods were sold to its depot/branches. In this connection, it may be noted that 25% of the total sales was to independent buyers. In other words, the goods were partly sold at the factory gate and partly from the depot. The assessee has not led evidence to j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
