2002 (8) TMI 670

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Jain, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B Nair, Member (T)]. - The appellants are manufacturers of Formaldehyde which is liable to duty under Chapter 2912 of Central Excise Tariff Act. The present appeal is directed against a duty demand of over Rs. 9 Lakhs and an imposition of penalty over Rs. 1 Lakh in respect of Formaldehyde B grade removed by the appellants from their factory at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the buyers premises. The learned Counsel pointed out that during the relevant period the appellants were making delivery in their own tankers and that they were charging Rs. 100 towards freight and Rs. 30 towards octroi. The learned Counsel of the appellants pointed out that under Section 4(1)(b) of Central Excise Act, deduction of freight was mandatory. So was the position with regard to taxes a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of sale and invoices were known to the Central Excise authorities and, therefore, demanding of short levy by invoking extended period under proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act as done by the lower authorities was not justified at all. The learned Counsel submitted that since the facts about the appellants sale pattern was known to the Central Excise authorities, the finding regarding....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve considered the submissions made on behalf of both sides. The valuation on the basis of which the demand and imposition of penalty have been made is patently illegal. Section 4(1)(b) of Central Excise Act makes it clear that if normal sale price at the factory gate is not available and the price for delivery at another place is treated as the basis for arriving at the assessable value, due deduc....