Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the impugned goods, being an aerosol insect killer, were covered by the relevant notification so as to be assessable under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 instead of Section 4 of that Act.
Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier decision holding that a product which repels and kills mosquitoes and other insects falls within the scope of the notification covering mosquito coils, mats and other mosquito repellants. On that basis, the goods were treated as covered by the notification and eligible for valuation under Section 4A.
Conclusion: Section 4A assessment was held to be the correct mode of assessment, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.
Final Conclusion: The valuation adopted by the adjudicating authority was sustained, resulting in dismissal of the Revenue's challenge.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the product answers the description of mosquito repellants under the applicable notification, assessment under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies.