Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Urisan Cosmetics Liberty on 29 August, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT No. II APPEAL No.E/3364, 3365, 3366, 3367 & 3368/04 (Arising out of Order-in-Original No.29/2003 dated 28/1/2003 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Honble Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) 1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see :No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :Yes CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy :Seen of the Order? 4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental :Yes authorities? ========================================
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Appellant Vs. Urisan Cosmetics Liberty Tiles Compound Godrej Soaps Ltd., Respondents Shri P.D.Purav Urisan Cosmetics Appearance:
Shri.Shobha Ram, Comm. (AR) for appellant Shri.Sanjeev Dahiya, G.M. for Godrej Soaps CORAM:
Honble Mr. P.R.Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Honble Mr.Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing : 29/08/2013 Date of Decision : 29/08/2013 ORDER NO Per: P.R.Chandrasekharan
1. The Revenue is in appeal against Order-in-Original No.29/2003 dated 28/1/2003 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai.
2. The issue involved is whether a multi-piece package consisting of three individual packages of three grams each of hair dye would be leviable to excise duty on the basis of valuation as determined under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or on the value determined under Section 4 of the said Act. The adjudicating authority in the impugned order held that the multi-piece package is also a retail package and since quantity contained in multi-piece package is less than ten grams, the respondents are eligible for the benefit of exemption from affixing MRP under Rule 34 of the of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rule, 1977. Aggrieved of the same, the Revenue is before us.
3. The only ground urged in the appeal memorandum is the exemption under Rule 34 of the Packed Commodity Rules, 1977 is not applicable to multi-piece packages irrespective of quantity contained and would be liable to excise duty under the provisions of Section 4A.
4. The Ld. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue fairly submits that issue has been settled against the Revenue by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Mumbai Vs. Urison Cosmetics Ltd. 2006 (198) ELT 508 (Tri-LB) and Honble apex Court in the case of CCE, Vapi Vs. Kraftech Products 2008 (224) ELT 504 (SC). In these decisions it has been held that even a multi-piece package would be eligible for the exemption under Section 34 of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rule, 1977 and if the quantity contained in the multi-piece package is less than 10 grams, there is no statutory requirement of affixing MRP on these products and therefore, the provisions of Section 4A of Central Excise Act, would not be attracted.
5. In view of the above legal position, we do not find any merit in the appeals filed by the Revenue. Accordingly, they are dismissed as devoid of merits.
(Dictated in Court) (Anil Choudhary) Member (Judicial) (P.R. Chandrasekharan) Member (Technical) pj 1 3