2018 (12) TMI 357

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cts cleared by them. There are two disputes in the present appeal. The first one is with reference to eligibility of the appellant for refund of education/ higher education cess paid by them on such final products. The Revenue entertained a view that such cess is not refundable as no exemption is provided for the same. 2. On the issue relating to refund of education cess, both the sides agreed that the issue stands covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Guwahati - 2017-TIOL-416-SC-CX. As such, following the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court who held that the assessee is eligible for such refund which is paid alongwith the excise duty once the excise duty itself was exempted. As such, the appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt should form part of the assessable value in such FOR sale. In this connection, we note that the learned AR relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE, Nagpur vs. Ispat Industries Ltd. - 2015 (324) E.L.T. 670 (S.C.). In the said decision the Apex court held "under no circumstances can the buyer's premises, therefore, be the place of removal for the purpose of Section 4 on the facts of the present case". The Apex court also distinguished their earlier decision in Rooffit Industries - 2015 (319) E.L.T. 221 (S.C.). The Apex Court observed as below :- "16. It will thus be seen that where the price at which goods are ordinarily sold by the assessee is different for different places of removal, then each such price shall be deemed ....