2016 (12) TMI 1124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ged the excise duty on the value which is MRP minus 40% abatement. Show cause notice was issued wherein it was proposed that since the refrigerators supplied by the appellant are not an retail sales price, whereas it is supplied in bulk to the soft drink manufacturer, therefore the valuation of the refrigerators is correctly required under Section 4 and not Section 4A. Accordingly the demand of differential duty was raised. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed the penalty and demanded the interest. Being aggrieved by the original order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order allowed the appeal of the appellant relying on the CESTAT Larger Bench decision in the case of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....). 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. We find that since the issue involved in the present case has already been settled in the appellant s own case by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jayanti Food Processing (P) Ltd. (supra), we need not to go into the issue once again. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Tribunal order held as under: "35. These appeals filed by the Revenue Department are against the Electrolux Kelvinator Ltd., and Electrolux India Ltd. These cases pertain to the valuation of the Refrigerators manufactured by the assessees. It is a common plea that after the manufacture of these Refrigerators, they are sold to the Bottling Companies like P....