TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (10) TMI 75
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Metal Box Company of India Limited, were manufacturing tubes, popularly known as "aluminium collapsible and rigid tubes". The collapsible tube is a cylinder of pliable metal. These tubes were originally manufactured from lead but later they were being manufactured predominantly from aluminium. The respondent was manufacturing the said tubes from aluminium by extrusion, i.e., by forcing slugs or lumps of aluminium through a die under pressure. This process is called "Extrusion process". After the tube is delivered from the extrusion press, it is trimmed to a correct length and its nozzle is threaded to the appropriate specification. According to the respondent, the operation of extrusion is completed at this stage and the resultant product i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itted to extruded aluminium tubes in the assessable value of such tubes. The respondent also asked for the quashing of the demand notice issued by the Central Excise Officer. It is significant to note that while the controversy raised by the respondent before the excise authorities pertained only to the inclusion of the value of the plastic caps in the assessable value of the said tubes, a larger relief was asked in the writ petition seeking the exclusion of the value of coating/printing in addition to the exclusion of the value of plastic caps. The learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition. The reasoning of the learned Single Judge is to be found in the following observations : "It is accepted on behalf of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e duty." 5.The learned Judge relied upon and followed the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Extrusion Process Private Limited v. N.R. Jadhav,, Superintendent of Central Excise [1979 (4) E.L.T. (J 380) = 74 Gujarat Law Reporter 161]. A writ appeal preferred by the Revenue against the judgment of the learned Single Judge was dismissed in limine by a Division Bench of the High Court on March 24, 1980 (Appeal No. 129 of 1980). 6.A reading of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, which is rendered on July 24, 1979, shows that it is influenced by the concept of "post-manufacturing expenses" which was then in vogue but which theory has since been rejected by this Court in Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International [1981 (14) E.L.T. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s a product of thickness (Excluding any backing) not exceeding 0-15 millimetres. (d) Pipes and tubes, other than extruded pipes and tubes. (e) Extruded shapes and sections including extruded pipes and tubes." Subsequently, Clause (f) has been added in the above Tariff Item, which reads : "(f) Containers, plain, lacquered or printed or lacquered and printed". The definition of "manufacture", as inserted by the Finance Act (No. 25) of 1975 with effect from March 1, 1975 reads, insofar as is relevant, thus : "(2f) `Manufacture' includes any process incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured process; and ........" Section 4 provides that where the duty of excise is chargeable with reference to value, such value s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ufacturer and that it is not the bare manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit which constitute the basis for determining such value. It has also been held that no deductions except those provided by Section 4 are permissible to be made from the wholesale price and that all expenses incurred on account of several factors which have contributed to the value of the excisable goods upto the date of sale/date of delivery are liable to be included. Applying the said test, it would be evident that the theory underlying the judgment of the learned Single Judge that only the value of the extruded tube shall form the basis of the assessable value and that the costs/charges for coating/printing etc. are not includible in the assessable value, is u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s possible. There has been no investigation of this factual aspect in this case because the respondent rushed to the High Court soon after receiving the demand notice. Moreover, the said decision was rendered prior to the decisions of this Court in Bombay Tyre International and Madras Rubber Factory Limited. We do not, however, express any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the said decision of the Tribunal in Metal Box of India Ltd. [1983 (13) E.L.T. 956]. The proper course in the circumstances is to leave the matter to be gone into and determined by the appropriate authority in charge of approving the price list. The authority shall decide the said question after ascertaining the relevant facts and in the light of the law declared....