TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (5) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri R.K. Roy, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. - Short question in this appeal is whether an amount of Rs. 13.50 (or a similar amount) declared by them in their Price List as being collected on account of protective packing on request is liable to form part of the value of the excisable goods namely 'Yeast' or not. Ld. Advocate, Shri S.P. Majumder submits that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....request which is different from their normal mode of sale of the excisable product at the factory gate. It is this protective packing i.e. the packing to protect inner whole sale package which is in dispute in this matter. It is no doubt true, he submits that 95% of sales of the excisable product have gone in the aforesaid protective packing but nevertheless, he submits that the sale at the factor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alled protective packing, therefore, it becomes a normal packing by virtue of volume of sale and hence it is also required to be included in the value of the excisable goods. On the question of plea of limitation raised by the appellants before the said authority, he submits that the price list did not categorically declare with the so-called protective packing whether it was a normal packing or s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the goods in wholesale market at the factory gate. On limitation, he submits that a very clear declaration has been made for cols. 6 and 7 of the price lists that Rs. 13.50 or a similar amount (which have been changing from time to time) on account of protective packing on request of buyers has not been included in the price declared in the price list. He, therefore, submits that the finding of ....