2006 (3) TMI 392

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The appellant M/s. Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. is a bottler of well-known soft drinks (Coca Cola, Limca etc.) at Varanasi. Excise duty demand under the impugned order is for the period June 1999 to May 2000. During this period, the soft drinks in question were required to be valued for the purpose of assessing them to excise duty in terms of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. The provision of that Section is that assessable value shall be the retail sale price declared of such goods less such amount of abatement, if any, from such retail price as the Central Government may allow by notification in the Official Gazette". At. the time of clearance of the goods covered in the present proceeding the appellant had valued the soft ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... though has been the same. Firstly, it is contended that the measure fixed under Section 4A is that retail sale price declared on such goods less such amount of abatement shall be the value. It is the appellant's submission that payment of duty, in all circumstances, has to be in terms of this measure and that the actual sale price was wholly irrelevant to the assessment. Thus, it is being contended that the revenue authorities were legally in error in assuming that 'actual' sale price could be substituted for the declared price. The second contention is that it is a gross error, and contrary to the judicially recognized practice in the soft drink industries, to treat rental charges of crates and bottles as a flow-back. 6. In additi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....art of the assessable value of beverages since hiring out of these items is a ancillary and allied activity, separate from the manufacture and sale of soft drinks. 9. Learned counsel has further submitted that the finding on flow-back is entirely erroneous and contrary to evidence inasmuch as, firstly rental charges of bottle are entirely for different consideration than sale of beverages and secondly, as explained through the costing data to the lower authorities, the retail price declared by the appellant-manufacturer took in all costs and profits including that of the retailer and there was sufficient margin within the declared MRP to provide for all costs and legitimate profits of every link in the distribution chain. 10.&ems....