2026-VIL-703-CESTAT-BLR-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Valuation under Section 4 or Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of LED Light Fixtures and Solar Lights - Department alleged that the appellant did not adopt MRP-based valuation under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act and initiated proceedings. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the valuation under Section 4 and held that the goods should be revalued by adopting MRP-based valuation under Section 4A, confirming the differential demand with interest and imposing an equal amount of penalty - Whether the valuation should be adopted under Section 4 or Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – HELD - Since the subject goods are not liable for Maximum Retail Price (MRP) declaration and have been cleared to Industrial and Institutional Consumers and labelled "Not for retail sale-for Industrial/Institutional use only", the valuation based on MRP in terms of Section 4A of the CEA, 1944 is not attracted. The Rule 3 of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2015 provides that the provisions of Chapter II (which includes the requirement of MRP declaration) shall not apply to packaged commodities meant for industrial or institutional consumers. Therefore, the adoption of Section 4A is unsustainable, and the impugned order is liable to be set aside - Further, the invocation of the extended period for the demand of duty and imposition of penalty is also not sustainable. The impugned order confirming the differential duty demand along with the interest and imposition of penalty is set aside and the appeal is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page