TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether individual sugar confectionery weighing less than 10 grams, when packed in larger wholesale packs, is assessable under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on MRP basis or under Section 4 on transaction value. (ii) Whether Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 can be invoked where the differential duty shown in invoices was subsequently reversed by credit notes and was not retained as collected duty.
Issue (i): Whether individual sugar confectionery weighing less than 10 grams, when packed in larger wholesale packs, is assessable under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on MRP basis or under Section 4 on transaction value.
Analysis: The applicable valuation depended on whether the individual confectionery pieces required declaration of retail sale price. Rule 34(b) of the Standards of Weights & Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, both before and after the amendment of 13.01.2007, exempted packages containing goods of ten grams or ten millilitres or less from the retail sale price requirement. The goods in question were individual confectionery pieces below 10 grams. The earlier decision in the assessee's own case, affirmed by the Supreme Court, had held that the individual pieces, and not the wholesale outer pack, were relevant for the valuation exercise. The amendment to Rule 2(j) did not alter the effect of Rule 34(b).
Conclusion: The goods were not liable to assessment under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The valuation was rightly under Section 4, and the Revenue's appeal failed.
Issue (ii): Whether Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 can be invoked where the differential duty shown in invoices was subsequently reversed by credit notes and was not retained as collected duty.
Analysis: Section 11D applies only where duty or an amount represented as duty is actually collected from the buyer and not paid to the Government. Here, although invoices reflected duty under Section 4A, the assessee issued credit notes for the differential amount and thus did not retain that amount as collected duty. The record also showed payment of duty under protest followed by credit notes. On these facts, the essential requirement of actual collection remained unproved.
Conclusion: Section 11D could not be invoked, and the demand confirmed under that provision was unsustainable.
Final Conclusion: The valuation dispute was decided in favour of the assessee, and the demand under Section 11D was also set aside, resulting in dismissal of the Revenue's appeal and allowance of the assessee's appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: For goods exempt from retail sale price declaration under the packaged commodities rules, MRP-based excise valuation under Section 4A does not apply to individual sub-10-gram units, and Section 11D is attracted only when duty represented as such is actually collected and retained from the buyer.
TaxTMI 
