TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 216
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... partly through consignment agents. The dispute is with reference to the valuation of goods cleared from the factory but sold through consignment agents. The appellant claims that they had paid Central Excise Duty by adopting the value as per Rule, 7 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable goods) Rules, 2000. But the Revenue investigated into such transactions and came to conclusion that differential duty is required to be paid and after issue of Show Cause Notice, ordered payment of differential duty. In the impugned order, the differential duty demand was sustained and in addition, penalties were also imposed not only on appellant but also on its Director. These findings have been challenged in the present app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmissioner (Appeals) and hence, he prayed that the impugned order may be sustained. 5. The dispute in the present case is about the valuation to be adopted for payment of duty on the goods cleared from the factory but subsequently sold from the premises of consignment agents. The dispute covered the period August, 2004 to May, 2005. When the sale take place from the premises of the consignment agent, in terms of Section 4 (1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the valuation is required to be determined in terms of Central Excise Valuation Rules. After perusal of the relevant rules it is seen that such cases are to be valued in terms of Rule 7 of the Valuation Rules. For ready reference, Rule 7 is reproduced below:- "Where the excisab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on each removal shall, in a case where the goods are sold for delivery at the time and place of the removal, be the transaction value. In any other case, the value shall be determined under the Central Excise Valuation Rules. As in the present matter, the goods are only sold from the consignment stock agent's place, the assessable value has to be determined under the Valuation Rules, 2000 and admittedly the Rule applicable is Rule 7 which reads as under :- " Rule 7.Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee at the time and place of removal but are transferred to a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises (hereinafter referred to as "such other place") from where the excisable goods are to be sold....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of removal of goods. The Board has also clarified this position vide Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX, dated 1-7-2002. A doubt was raised as the definition of normal transaction value Rule 2(b) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules does not indicate the time period over which the "greatest aggregate quantity" is to be computed. The Board has clarified as under : - "The term "greatest aggregate quantity" has been used to define the term "normal transaction value" used in rules 7 and 9 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. Seen in this context the time period should be taken as the whole day and the transaction value of the "greatest aggregate quantity" would refer to the price at which the l....