2024-VIL-384-CESTAT-MUM-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise – Manufacture of medicaments – Determination of assessable value – Demand of duty – Appellant is engaged in manufacture of Medicaments, which were marketed through distributors – Revenue issued show cause notice to Appellant questioning non-inclusion of certain expenditures borne by distributors in assessable value – Adjudicating authority confirmed demand of differential duty – Appellate authority set aside demand and remanded matter to adjudicating authority – Adjudicating authority once again confirmed demand proposed in show cause notice – Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed order passed by Adjudicating authority – Whether Adjudicating authority is justified in holding that expenditures incurred by distributors are includible in assessable value – HELD – Issue of relationship of Appellant with distributors having influenced price to warrant adoption of alternative valuation stood settled in favour of Appellant as far as back in year 1992 upon finding of first appellate authority disclaiming relationship with sole distributor and failure of Revenue to file appeal thereto – Once decision is rendered inter parties and attains finality, a different view cannot be taken – First appellate authority had traversed propriety in not enforcing its own earlier decision – Order passed in de novo proceedings by original authority was not correct in law and which was upheld in impugned order was also incorrect in law – impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) set aside – Appeal allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page