J.K. Papers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

J.K. Papers Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jul 31, 2003

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/31769

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/31769
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: K Usha, N T C.N.B.
Decided On: Jul 31, 2003
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

J.K. Papers Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(90)ECC498

Excerpt

.....value. differential duty demand was raised by the central excise authorities on the ground that assessable value was required to be determined on the basis of normal price prevailing at the time of original clearance of the goods from the factory and not at the sale price at a later date for deteriorated goods. it is the submission of the appellants that sale price on the goods is the relevant price for the purpose of determining assessable value and that export price had no relevance for assessment. in support, reference has also been made to the decision of this tribunal in the case of rajasthan spinning & weaving mills ltd. v. c.c.e., jaipur-ii [2000 (121) e.l.t. 790 (t)].2. the learned sdr has contended that valuation of the goods has been correctly done by the lower authorities. it is her submission that in terms of section 4 of central excise act, 1944 the normal price of the goods at the time of their removal from the factory is to be the assessable value. according to her, viewed in the light of this provision, the sale price of the same goods at the time of original removal from the factory was to be taken as the assessable value. she has pointed out that the subsequent deterioration of the paper and the consequent depreciation in value are of no relevance for the valuation of the goods. it was also submitted that the value adopted for determining central excise duty amount by the lower authorities was the value prevailing for such papers on the date of their clearance from the factory for home consumption, and not the export price. learned sdr has also pointed out that valuation adopted by the lower authorities is in conformity with the decision of this tribunal in the case of rajasthan spinning & weaving mills ltd. (supra).3. central excise duty is a duty on production and where the duty is on the basis of value, the value to be adopted is the normal price at which "such goods are ordinarily sold by the assessee to a buyer in the.....

Full Judgment

1. This appeal of M/s. J.K. Papers Ltd. is directed against the confirmation of a duty demand of Rs. 65,731/-. The facts leading to the duty demand is that the appellants cleared, without payment of duty, a quantity of about 84 MT of writing and printing papers for export to Bangladesh. Part of the goods were not accepted by the foreign purchaser. Accordingly, they were sold to buyers in India at a lower price on account of deterioration in quality because of long storage.

The appellants paid central excise duty on these goods taking the sale price as the assessable value. Differential duty demand was raised by the Central Excise authorities on the ground that assessable value was required to be determined on the basis of normal price prevailing at the time of original clearance of the goods from the factory and not at the sale price at a later date for deteriorated goods. It is the submission of the appellants that sale price on the goods is the relevant price for the purpose of determining assessable value and that export price had no relevance for assessment. In support, reference has also been made to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. v. C.C.E., Jaipur-II [2000 (121) E.L.T. 790 (T)].

2. The learned SDR has contended that valuation of the goods has been correctly done by the lower authorities. It is her submission that in terms of Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 the normal price of the goods at the time of their removal from the factory is to be the assessable value. According to her, viewed in the light of this provision, the sale price of the same goods at the time of original removal from the factory was to be taken as the assessable value. She has pointed out that the subsequent deterioration of the paper and the consequent depreciation in value are of no relevance for the valuation of the goods. It was also submitted that the value adopted for determining central excise duty amount by the lower authorities was the value prevailing for such papers on the date of their clearance from the factory for home consumption, and not the export price. Learned SDR has also pointed out that valuation adopted by the lower authorities is in conformity with the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. (supra).

3. Central Excise duty is a duty on production and where the duty is on the basis of value, the value to be adopted is the normal price at which "such goods are ordinarily sold by the assessee to a buyer in the course of wholesale trade for delivery at the time and place of removal". Therefore, the price to be adopted was ex-factory price at the time of removal i.e. original non-duty paid removal for export.

Subsequent events like deterioration of the goods during storage and depreciation of value are not material for determining the assessable value and the quantum of duty payable. Admittedly, in the present case, the lower authorities have determined the assessable value at the price prevailing at the time of removal from the factory in respect of domestic sales. This action is entirely in conformity with the legal provision in Section 4. Our decision in Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. also supports such valuation.

4. In view of what has been stated above, there is no merit in the appeal and it is rejected.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties J.K. Papers Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge K Usha, N T C.N.B.