TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 338
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....framed for consideration by this Court: "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, where the entire proceeding was on the basis of Board Circular dated 01-07-2007 and the entire proceedings was on the basis of the said circular, whether the 1st respondent was correct is directing the authority to follow the another circular for the first time which was not the subject matter of the proceedings initiated against the Appellants for the denial of refund claim" 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, where it is well settled that the Board circular would be applicable only prospectively, whether the 1st respondent was correct in directing the authority to follow the Board circular dated 13.02.2003 for the past period? . 3. Accord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... also supplied, a part of their production, free of cost to physicians for promotion of their business. 7.3. Therefore, the Revenue was faced with a situation, as to how, that part of the production which was sold as physician's samples had to be valued. 7.4. The Assessee, however, paid duty on the physician's samples on the basis of assessable value arrived at, on a pro-rata basis, which was a ratio of the sale price of similar goods sold in the market. 7.5. It appears that at some point in time, the Assessee became aware of the 2002 circular issued by the Board and thus, proceeded to re-work the assessable value, in respect of the products put into the market in the form of physician's samples. Accordingly, the value arrive....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... who appears on behalf of the Assessee says, that the Tribunal has erred in law and in fact in directing the application of the 2003 circular for the following reasons: (i) The circular can apply only be prospectively. For this purpose, he relies upon the language of the circular, in particular, the use of the expression, henceforth in the circular. It is, thus, submitted that, since, the period in issue spans between 01.08.2001 and 31.7.2002, it cannot apply to the case of the Assessee. (ii) The circular, pertains to valuation of captively consumed goods and therefore, has no relevance to the goods in issue, i.e., the physician's samples, which are not intermediate, but final products. (iii) Since, the information with respect to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le can only be based on the actual cost of production to the assessee. The assessable value, as indicated in the 2002 circular, is 115% of the cost of production. The Tribunal having come to this conclusion, in our opinion ought not to have taken recourse to the 2003 circular. Mr.Srinivas's argument that because the Assessee was not able to furnish the break-up of factory overheads that the Tribunal was compelled to take recourse to the 2003 circular does not seem to emerge upon reading of the Judgement of the Tribunal. As a matter of fact, the Tribunal quite clearly, seeks to apply the 2003 circular which adverts to the CAS-4 methodology. Furthermore, as it appears, the Tribunal only to obtain more clarity qua the ascertainment of cost....