Judgment: 1. The respondents are not present. There is also no request for adjournment despite notice. Heard the Ld. SDR. These appeals are filed by the appellant Commissioner against the impugned order-in-appeal. The original authority had denied Modvat credit in respect of packing material, anti-static oil, lubricating oil, bobbins, spools, paper tubes and similar other inputs used in the conversion of POY into PTY on the ground that the value of these inputs were not included in the value of PTY (finished goods) since tariff values were fixed for PTY.The lower appellate authority has allowed the Modvat credit on the ground that there is no logic in the assumption/presumption of the original authority that value of the inputs are not included in the computation of the tariff value.
2. After hearing the Ld. DR and perusal of case records, we find that under the Excise law, value of the finished goods can be determined either under Section 4 or under Section 4A. However, such valuation is not necessary when tariff value is fixed under Section 3(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. These are alternative methods of arriving at the value for determining ad valorem duty. Hence, we are of the view that the lower appellate authority's finding is correct that tariff value has to be taken as inclusive of the value of all the elements that go into the making of the finished goods including packing and processing/manufacturing. Hence, the order of the lower appellate authority allowing the duty credit for the impugned inputs does not call for any interference.