2018 (2) TMI 1305

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ma, Advocate for the Appellants Shri R K Mishra, DR for the Respondent ORDER Per: B Ravichandaran Both the appeals are against the common impugned order No.BHO-EXCUS-002-APP-052-16-17 dated 27.05.2016 of Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur. The main appellant M/s. Godriwala Plastics Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of plastic furniture under various brand names. Present dispute is with referen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he main appellant manufactured plastic furniture as per the requirement of second appellant. He relied on the terms of agreement as per MOU to state that arrangement cannot be considered as job worker arrangement. They have freedom to fix the price and same is not dictated by the brand owner. He also submitted that M/s. Nilkamal Ltd. had such arrangement with various manufacturers similar to one p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as power and entire control over the appellant with reference to branded goods. He supported the findings with reference to application of Rule 10A. 5. We have heard Shri J M Sharma and Shri R K Mishra, learned representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The dispute is with reference to valuation of branded furniture cleared by the main appellant with brand na....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....held that there is no job worker arrangement. The fact M/s. Nilkamal has sold the said furniture with much higher price and hence Rule 10A of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, apply to manufacture of the appellant is not tenable. The goods sold by M/s. Neelkamal is on the higher price as it includes expenses like storage, advertisement and sales after the goods were received from the appellant....