2018 (1) TMI 686

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e issue is common, they are taken up together for disposal. For the sake of convenience, we mention the facts from the appeal of M/s Keshav Resin Coats Pvt. Ltd., are as under:- 3. The appellant are unregistered unit manufacturing coated abrasive falling under Chapter Heading No.6805 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, filed a refund claim for Rs. 2,35,389/- on 23.01.2009 on the facts and grounds that they are manufacturer of excisable goods namely; coated abrasives and are availing exemption under Notification No.8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 as amended. During the financial years 2006-07 and 2007-08, they manufactured branded goods for M/s Brindwell Norton Ltd., Bangalore and cleared the same without payment of Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... manufacturer that price of goods includes excise duty payable by him, no question of exclusion of duty element from the price will arise for determination of value under Section 4 (4) (d) (ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944-one cannot go by general implication that wholesale price would always mean cum-duty price, particularly when assessee cleared the goods during relevant years on the basis of exemption Notification No. 08/2003 dated 01.03.03. In the instant case, the unit has not built-in the element of excise duty in the value charged and while accepting the same they paid duty on their own volition. Now they cannot say that the transaction value charged by them was cum-duty price. Hence, they would not be entitled to any refund on ac....