Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2007 (9) TMI 246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssed on the basis of maximum retail sale price under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944. During the course of scrutiny of the sale invoices, it appeared that the respondents have manufactured and cleared the product TATA MIDA 17.8 SL in 50 ml bottles on payment of duty and paid duty on the basis of contract rates and as per the purchase order without declaring the MRP price on the bottles of 50 ml. As per the respondents, they were not liable to be assessed under Section 4A as according to them, these 50 ml bottles were meant for free distribution by M/s. Mahyco Seeds Limited to farmers along with seeds, which is their own product sold by them to farmers. It was stated that since the product TATA MIDA 50 ml PACK was not sold by M/s. Mah....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 is available in respect of those cases where marking on the package unambiguously indicates that it has been specifically packed for exclusive use of any industry as raw material or for the purpose of serving any industry, mine or quarry. The Boards' Circular has also cited the situation when MRP cannot be printed as "Bulk supply for personal as well as industrial use". Since the respondents' product was neither required as raw material for industrial use nor it was supplied for personal use in the said industry as bulk supply and therefore it was not exempted under Rule 34 and was accordingly was liable to be assessed under Section 4. It was submitted that even Board's Circular No. 843/1/20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeals filed as reported in 2007 (215) E.L.T. 327 (S.C.) = 2007-TIOL-150-S.C.-C.X. in the case of Jayanti Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajasthan and others. In this case while dealing with the appeal of Nestle India Limited where Nestle India Limited which was engaged in the manufacture of chocolate which was a commodity notified under Section 4A and liable to be assessed on the basis of MRP for which had entered into agreement with M/s. Pepsico India Holdings Ltd., where the agreed price of the KITKAT packet was Rs. 4.80 and the chocolate so purchased at that price by M/s. Pepsico India Holdings Ltd. was meant for free supply of the same along with one bottle of Pepsi of 1.5 litres in pursuance of their Sal....