Differential duty on depot clearances to consignment agents rejected where prior identical assessment governed the valuation basis.

Differential duty on depot clearances to consignment agents was held not payable where the goods were already correctly assessed and the higher resale price charged by the agents did not alter the assessable basis. The tribunal followed its earlier decision in the assessee's own case on identical clearances for an earlier period, finding no distinction in the factual or legal position. On that basis, the demand was held unsustainable and the appeals were allowed in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether differential duty was payable on clearances from the depot to consignment agents on the basis of the higher resale price charged by the consignment agents.

Analysis: The earlier decision in the assessee's own case, involving identical clearances from the depot to consignment agents for an earlier period, had held that the goods were correctly assessed and that no differential duty was payable. That decision was not distinguished, and the same factual and legal position governed the present appeals.

Conclusion: The demand of differential duty was not sustainable and the appeals were allowed in favour of the assessee.

---