2015 (11) TMI 241

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2. The facts leading to filing of this ROM application are, in brief, as under: 2.1 The appellant are manufacturers of paper and paper board chargeable to Central Excise Duty and the period of dispute is from March, 2000 to June, 2001. There were two points of dispute with regard to the valuation of goods being manufactured by the appellant. The first point of dispute was as to whether freight and transit insurance charges being recovered at the rate of 0.2% of the value of the goods would be includible in assessable value and the second point of dispute was as to whether Dharmada charges being recovered by the appellant from their customers at the rate of 0.2% of the value of the goods would be includible in the assessable value. 2.2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... various judgments of the Tribunal and the Apex Court were in the favour of the appellant and it is only in October, 2002 that the Apex Court took contrary view that dharmada charges are includible in the assessable value and therefore, there was no malafide on the part of the appellant in not including the dharmada charges and the assessable value. It has been pleaded that a specific plea that penalty is not imposable had been made in the grounds of appeal but the final order upholds the part of the Commissioner (appeals)'s order in respect of dharmada charges and hence there is a mistake apparent- from the records which requires rectification. 3. Heard both the sides. 4. Ms. Surbhi Sinha, Advocate, ld. Counsel for the appellant,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ex Court's judgment on the issue of inclusion of dharmada charges in the assessable value was in the favour of the assessee, in view of its judgment in the case of Mohan and Co. Madras Vs. CCE-Madras reported in 1987 (30) ELT 624 (Tri-Del). It is only subsequently that the Apex Court in its judgment in the case of Collector of Central Excise Vs. Panchmukhi Engg. Works reported in 2003 (158) ELT 550 SC reversed its earlier view holding that the dharmada charges are includible in the assessable value. The Apex Court in the case of Mentha & Allied Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Meerut reported in 2004 (167) ELT 499 SC has held that when different views were expressed at different stages by the Tribunal and High Courts, applicati....