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 footwear falling under Tariff Heading 64.01, once specified under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by the relevant notifications, had to be valued only under Section 4A on the basis of retail sale price, or whether valuation could still be governed by Section 4 for the purpose of applying Tariff sub-heading 6401.12.
Analysis: Footwear under Tariff Heading 64.01 was notified for valuation under Section 4A, and Notification No. 40/97-C.E. (N.T.) fixed abatement at 50 per cent of the maximum retail price. Section 4A(2) contains a non obstante clause and provides that, where goods are specified under Section 4A(1), the value determined under that provision overrides Section 4. On the admitted position that the goods were so specified, the valuation mechanism under Section 4A had to govern, and there was no showing that the post-abatement retail price exceeded the threshold of Rs. 75 per pair.
Conclusion: The valuation of the footwear was to be determined under Section 4A and not under Section 4, and the applicants showed a strong prima facie case for stay and waiver of pre-deposit.
Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are specifically notified under Section 4A, the valuation under that provision overrides Section 4 by virtue of the non obstante clause, and the retail sale price method must be applied for those goods.