SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(SC) 557

S.N.VARIAVA, A.R.LAKSHMANAN, S.H.KAPADIA
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Belgaum – Appellant
Versus
Akay Cosmetics Pvt. LTD. – Respondent


Judgment

Kapadia, J.—If the selling price of M/s Nemaru “a related person” as defined in section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short “the 1944 Act”) was considered as the basis of the assessable value in terms of proviso (iii) to section 4(1)(a) for the goods manufactured and cleared by M/s Akay Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. (assessee herein), then was the claim for deduction from the assessable value in respect of cost of secondary packing (special packing), freight, handling charges, insurance, octroi, turnover tax and cost of bought-out items admissible under section 4(4)(d) of the 1944 Act, is the question which arises for determination in these captioned civil appeals filed by the department under section 35-L (b) of the 1944 Act, as it then stood.

2. M/s Akay Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd., Hubli (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as “the assessee”) was the manufacturer of instant hair colour under the brand name “Bigen”, falling under chapter sub-heading 3305.90. The assessee filed its price list No. 1/88-89 effective from 1.1.1988 in respect of the said product seeking approval of the assessable value @ Rs. 4.38 per bottle of 6 grams. Since the product was sold and ma
























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top