Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Reliance Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 17 September, 2001
JUDGMENT J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)
1. The facts being common in both these appeals, these are disposed of vide this single order.
2. Appellants had filed price list for Linear Alkyl Benzene in part I at the price of Rs.38750 per M.Tonne. They also filed a price list in Part-II for value of Rs.30,000/- per M.Tonne. Show cause notice was issued seeking recovery of the duty calculated on the difference between the two prices. The Assistant Collector confirmed the demand which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeals.
3. Before the Commissioner the Supreme Court order in the case of Metal Box India Ltd. were cited [1995 (75) ELT 449] was cited. The Commissioner distinguished the judgment and the other judgment like Goramal Hariram also in upholding the lower order. On perusal of fact we find no reason for the Commissioner to have made such distinction.
4. The plea taken by the appellants was that the lower prices were quoted in view of the large quantum of purchase as also on the ground of firm commitment. These were the grounds which led the Supreme Court to lay down the law in Metal Box India Ltd. judgment (Supra) Following that law the Tribunal in the case of Garware Synthetics Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [1999 (114) ELT 858 (Tribunal)] held that the phenomenon of part I price list for regular buyers existing along with Part II prices for contract buyers in existence together was permissible in terms of Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944.
5. Following the law laid down, these appeals are allowed. Consequential relief if any.
(Pronounced in Court)