2000 (11) TMI 1050

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he facts, in brief, are that the appellant submitted in all 61 price lists during the period 1989 to 1992 for approval in respect of parts of Radio Recorders, Radio Receivers and Combination Sets, Parts of Tape Recorders and Colour Television Sets and Tape Deck Mechanisms. The said price lists continued to remain pending approval. However, a show cause notice dated 11-1-93 was issued to the appellant alleging contravention of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 inasmuch as the appellant was alleged to have failed to submit sale bills etc. as documentary proof in support of their claim for deduction and the appellant was directed to submit the same within 30 days failing which the price lists would be finalised without allowing any ded....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ontracts between the assessee and their service centres/ dealers. If they are related persons the said price lists should be in Part II instead of Part-I as is done here and then the price (including additional consideration like service charges, if any or in the form of discount return, if any, at which service centres/ dealers are selling the goods will be the assessable value. (ii)     12 price lists have been approved as per Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 i.e. as per the best judgment which should have been in Part-VII price list form. Again the said application of Rule 7 should be considered when the approval is not possible as per Central Excise Valuation Rules, 4, 5 or 6. The matter has not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mentary proof in support of their claim for deduction in the price lists submitted by them as per the enclosures attached". From this it is evident, submits the learned Advocate, that there was no allegation in the Show Cause Notice regarding service centres/dealers of the appellant company being its "related persons" nor was the same a subject matter of dispute in finalisation of the concerned price lists and as such the question of the concerned Assistant Collector discussing this issue while passing the Adjudication Order could not and did not arise. He pleaded that the said issue is beyond the scope of the proceedings leading to passing of the Adjudication Order as well as the appeal proceedings arising therefrom. He further pleads that....