Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Hpl Socomac Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 4 February, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2005(182)ELT191(TRI-DEL)
ORDER C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)
1. The appellant is a manufacturer of electricity meters. It had a contract with Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. for supply of 65,000 meters upto 31-3-2002. The delivery was to be completed in a phased manner. The appellants could deliver 31,000 meters only within the contracted period. Accordingly, it is seen from the letter dated 11-4-2002 of buyer that a penalty upto 5% of the value was imposed on the appellants for delayed delivery. After completion of delivery of the entire consignment, the appellants filed refund claim on 20-11-2002 claiming assessment of the delayed quantity at a reduced price (5%). The lower authorities rejected the claim. The appellant is before us in appeal against the rejection.
2. We have perused the records and heard both the sides. It is noted that the original assessment, and payment of duty took place at the contracted price. The change in the amount paid is on account of imposition of penalty for delayed period. The penalty is separate from the price of the goods. There is no provision in the excise, law for allowing deduction of penalty from the sale price for the purpose of assessable value. In these circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is rejected.