Cce Vs. Veg Oil Ltd.

Cce vs Veg Oil Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Dec 26, 1997

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/12472

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/12472
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: U Bhat, S T K.
Decided On: Dec 26, 1997
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cce

Respondent

Veg Oil Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (1998)(75)LC112Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. respondent is absent and is unrepresented in spite of notice of hearing. there is no request for adjournment. we have heard shri m.ali, jdr.2. the short question is whether value of corrugated folded boxes used to pack 10 pouches, each containing 1kg. of vegetable product, is to be included or not in the assessable value under section 4 of the central excises act, 1944. the assistant collector took a view against the assessee and the collector (appeals) took a view in favour of the assessee. the department, being aggrieved, has filed this appeal.3. the question, as clarified by the supreme court in mrf. ltd., and geep industrial syndicate ltd., is whether such packing is necessary for the purpose of delivery in wholesale trade at the factory gate. the matter in this perspective has not been considered by either of the authorities. we, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the jurisdictional adjudicating authority for decision afresh in accordance with law. the appeal is allowed.

Full Judgment

1. Respondent is absent and is unrepresented in spite of notice of hearing. There is no request for adjournment. We have heard Shri M.Ali, JDR.2. The short question is whether value of corrugated folded boxes used to pack 10 pouches, each containing 1kg. of vegetable product, is to be included or not in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excises Act, 1944. The Assistant Collector took a view against the assessee and the Collector (Appeals) took a view in favour of the assessee. The Department, being aggrieved, has filed this appeal.

3. The question, as clarified by the Supreme Court in MRF. Ltd., and Geep Industrial Syndicate Ltd., is whether such packing is necessary for the purpose of delivery in wholesale trade at the factory gate. The matter in this perspective has not been considered by either of the authorities. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the jurisdictional adjudicating authority for decision afresh in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Cce vs Veg Oil Ltd. Same Subject MRTP Same Judge U Bhat, S T K.