Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Commissioner Of C. Ex., New Delhi vs Trishul Research Lab. (P) Ltd. on 19 April, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002(82)ECC183, 2002(144)ELT204(TRI-DEL)
ORDER C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)
1. This appeal of the Revenue is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 980-CE/DLH 2001, dated 16-10 2001 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi.
2. The COD application seeks condonation of delay of 27 days in preferring the appeal. Upon hearing both the sides we are satisfied that COD application merits acceptance.
3. The issue raised in this appeal relates to assessment of soaps sold under contract by the appellants to the Hotel Industry. The appellant who is a soap manufacturer sells Biotique and other branded soaps to the Hotel Industry for use by them for issuing to their guests. The prices were determined under contract. The soap is not sold but is issued to the guests who are staying in the Hotel. The question that arose for consideration was as to whether the valuation of such soaps was to be made under Section 4A of Central Excise Act or Section 4 of that Act. The Commissioner held in the impugned order that such sales of soap to hotel are also to be assessed under Section 4A(1). The present appeal of the Revenue challenges this decision.
4. Section 4A is a special provision for valuation of excisable goods with reference to their retail sale price. The Section applies to valuation of goods covered under provisions of Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 or the Rules made thereunder. Sub-Section 2 of Section 4A stipulates that the value of such goods shall be deemed to be the retail sale price declared on the package of the goods less such amount of abatement from such retail sales price as the Central Govt. may allow. It is the Revenue's case that in the present case, the soaps are not packed for retail sale and do not bear declaration on the retail package regarding the retail sale price. It is, therefore, contended that Provisions of Section 4A have no application to such cases and the goods were liable to be assessed under the Provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act.
5. We have perused the records and heard both sides. It is clear that the goods in question were not packed for retail sale. They were packed under a special contract for the hotel industry and were not required to bear the "maximum retail price" declaration on the retail package. Under such circumstances it is clear that the goods fall outside the purview of Section 4A. They are therefore required to be assessed in terms of the valuation provided for in Section 4.
6. In view of the above, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed after setting aside the impugned order and the adjudication order passed by the Dy. Commissioner is restored.