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 rebate allowed under the exemption notifications could be added to the assessable value for central excise purposes, and whether the matters required reconsideration in light of the Board circular.
Analysis: The dispute concerned valuation of soaps and whether the rebate granted under the specified notifications, issued under Rule 8, should be included in the assessable value under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The Tribunal noted that the issue had already been considered in earlier decisions, and that the Board circular had not been examined by the lower authorities. Following the earlier Tribunal view and the approach reflected in the Supreme Court's order referring to the circular, the Tribunal held that the proper course was to reconsider the valuation with reference to the circular and after giving the assessee an opportunity.
Conclusion: The assessable value dispute was sent back for fresh decision in accordance with the circular, and the appellants obtained remand relief.
Final Conclusion: The valuation orders did not attain finality and the matters were to be re-assessed by the departmental authority after considering the Board circular and the assessee's submissions.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a binding departmental circular materially bears on pending excise valuation disputes, the matter may be remanded for fresh assessment after considering the circular and affording the assessee an opportunity of hearing.