2006 (3) TMI 587
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Sahab, Consultant, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - The Revenue has filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 54/2004 (H-lll) C.E. dated 31-3-2004, passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. 2. The Respondents are manufacturers of LPG Cylinders. They had contract with various Oil Companies viz. M/s. IOCL, M/s.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r provisional assessment and as there is no scope to reverse the assessment already made. The appellants had approached the Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the appeal of the appellants relying on the following decisions :- (i) M/s. Indian Aluminium Cables v. CCE [1997 (95) E.L.T. 386 (T) = 1997 (71) ECR 565 (T) (ii) M/s. Premier Automobiles ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ise duty payment is concerned. The duty is chargeable at the rate and price when commodity is cleared at factory gate and not on the price reduced at a subsequent date is unexceptionable. The subsequent fluctuation and the prices of commodity can have no relevance whatsoever so far as the liability to pay excise duty is concerned. Roll back in the price would not entitle the appellant to claim a r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondents brought to our notice this Bench's Final Order No. 1933 & 1934/2005 dated 22-11-2005 [2006 (198) E.L.T. 45 (Tribunal)] in the case of CCE, Hyderabad v. M/s. R.M. Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Hyderabad Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. wherein the similar issue was decided. Findings in that decision are as follows :- "5. On a careful consideration, we notice that there is no dispute about the assesse....
TaxTMI