1985 (2) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st Schedule. They were covered under Chapter VIIA. They filed price lists No. 1/79, dated 17-3-1979,1/80 and 2/80 both dated 2-4-1980, 1/80 and 2/80 dated 19-6-1980 and 1/81 dated 16-4-1981 declaring therein the assessable value of their various products as the normal price at which their product was ordinarily sold in wholesale lots at the time of removal from the place of manufacture. The price lists were provisionally approved by the Assistant Collector under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules. The transport charges collected by the assessee were not included in the assessable value. 3. In these price lists so provisionally approved the Assistant Collector in his order dated 18-9-1981 observed that the price charged for the sale at t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he factory gate should be taken as assessable value under Section 4(a) irrespective of the quantum of such sales. He placed reliance of this proposition on the decision of the Madras High Court reported in 1979 E.L.T. J 117 [Nagpal Petro Chemicals Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of C. Ex.]. 6. Shri A.K. Jain, Senior Departmental Representative for the Department, reiterated the findings of the Appellate Collector and stated that the sale was to related person. He also submitted that the inclusion of transport charges was justified. 7. The following questions arise for decision in this case :- (i) Whether the lower authorities were right in holding that the sales to the distributors should be considered as sales to the related pers....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellants' sales are effected at the factory gate. The distributors clear the goods at the factory gate and transport them in their own vehicles. On some occasions, the goods are delivered to the respective parties, and for this service, the assessee is collecting by way of transport charges the sums of Rs. 3.05, Rs. 3.17 and Rs. 3.29 per crate for three different zones of delivery. The lower authorities have rejected the contentions of the appellants for the exclusion of these amounts on the ground that the appellants are having 3 equalised freights depending on the distances and therefore these freights were in the nature of equalised freights and not the actual transportation charges. It is well stated that if there are sales at the fact....