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

2002 Supreme(SC) 1112

Supreme Court Of India
ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED
Versus
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS
Decided on : November 13, 2002

Headnote:

Central Excise Act, 1944 Sections 4(i)(a), (b) and (4)(e)- Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975, Rule 6(b) (ii)- Valuation of for excise duty- The appellants manufacturers of motor vehicles and components thereof- The question was what would be the value for excise duty in respect of the components removed by the appellants from their factory- Held it was clear that Section 4(1)(b) will only apply if normal price is not ascertainable. In cases where price is not ascertainable, the valuation must be made on the basis of Rules 3 to 6 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975- All the removals from the factory gate of engines as OE to manufacturing units of respondents would be deemed to be removals to a separate class of buyers when compared to removals for wholesale sale as spare parts- Excise duty is payable on removal of goods. As there may be no sale at the time of removal, Section 4 of the Act lays down how the value has to be determined for the purposes of charging of excise duty,.[Paras6, 10 , 12 and 13]

( 1 ) THIS appeal is against an order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT), dated 20-1-1995.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are as follows: the appellants are manufacturers of motor vehicles. They also manufacture components of motor vehicles. The components are manufactured at their factory near Madras. Some of the components are then transferred from their factory at Madras to their own units at Hosur, Alwar and Bhandara. A small percentage of the components is also sold by them in the open market as spare parts for the vehicles. The question for consideration is what is the value to be taken for payment of excise duty in respect of the components which have been removed by the appellants from their factory at Madras and transferred to the units at Hosur, Alwar and bhandara.

( 3 ) THE Assistant Collector, Collector and CEGAT have held that the value has to be determined in accordance with Section 4 (1) (a) of the Central excise Act, 1944 (the Act ). It has been held that ascertainable sale price is available. According to the appellants, in respect of the components which are transferred by them to their sister units, the value has to be ascertained under Section 4 (1) (b ). According to the appellants, for such components there is no ascertainable sale price.

( 4 ) FOR a consideration of this question, the relevant provisions of the Act need to be set out.

( 5 ) SECTIONS 4 (l) (a), 4 (1) (b) and 4 (4) (e) read as follows:"4. Valuation of excisable goods for purposes of charging of duty of excise. (1) Where under this Act, the duty of excise is chargeable on any excisable goods with reference to value, such value shall, subject to the other provisions of this section, be deemed to be (a) the normal price thereof, that is to say, the 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, where the buyer is not a related person and the price is the sole consideration for the sale: provided that (i) where, in accordance with the normal practice of the wholesale trade in such goods, such goods are sold by the assessee at different prices to different classes of buyers (not being related persons) each such price shall, subject to the existence of the other circumstances specified in clause (a), be deemed to be the normal price of such goods in relation to each such class of buyers; (ii) where such goods are sold by the assessee in the course of wholesale trade for delivery at the time and place of removal at a price fixed under any law for the time being in force or at a price, being the maximum, fixed under any such law, then, notwithstanding anything contained in clause (iii) of this proviso, the price or the maximum price, as the case may be, so fixed, shall, in relation to the goods so sold, be deemed to be the normal price thereof; (iii) where the assessee so arranges that the goods are generally not sold by him in the course of wholesale trade except to or through a related person, the normal price of the goods sold by the assessee to or through such related person shall be deemed to be the price at which they are ordinarily sold by the related person in the course of wholesale trade at the time of removal, to dealers (not being related persons) or where such goods are not sold to such dealers, to dealers (being related persons) who sell such goods in retail; (b) where the normal price of such goods is not ascertainable for the reason that such goods are not sold or for any other reason the nearest ascertainable equivalent thereof determined in such manner as may be prescribed. (4) (e) wholesale trade means sales to dealers, industrial consumers, government, local authorities and other buyers, who or which purchase their requirements otherwise than in retail. "

( 6 ) THUS it is clear that Section 4 (1) (b) will only apply if normal price is not ascertainable. In cases where price is not ascertain







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 Back to top