TATA CHEMICALS LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various types of chemicals including soda ash. The final product manufactured by the appellant is delivered in wholesale either in loose form or packing in drums/jute bags. The appellant filed price list on Dec'70 to the Supdt. of Central Excise in respect of soda ash. The price mentioned in the price list in respect of soda ash was exclusive of charges for jute bags/containers. The price list was approved on 20.12.70. The present proceeding started with the letter issued by Supdt. of Central Excise on 1.5.1970 whereby the appellant was informed that packing charges in respect of the product soda ash should form part of the assessable value and should be included in the price list. After considering the reply, the appellant filed a fresh price list for approval in the year 1971,1972 and 1973. The price list was approved after adding charges for packing material. SCNs were issued to the appellant to add the various amounts of duty after including the cost of packing material and packing charges in respect of the assessable value of the soda ash. The Supdt. of Central Excise rejected the claim of the appellant and confirmed the SCNs. The appellant challenged the order before Asstt. Collector of Central Excise. The Asstt. Collector rejected the claim of the appellant.

(2.) THE appellant against the decision of the Asstt. Collector filed a writ petition of the Hon'ble High Court, Bombay. Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide order dt.19.9.79 set aside the order passed by the Asstt. Collector and allowed the petition filed by the appellant. Revenue challenged the order passed by Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dt.8.5.95 remanded the matter to the Asstt. Collector. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Govt. of India v. Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. held as under:

(3.) IN pursuance to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Asstt. Collector passed an adjudication order and held that the packing was not of durable and returnable in nature. The cost thereof packing with the cost of packing and packing material is includible in the assessable value of the soda ash manufactured by the appellant. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order upheld the order passed by the adjudicating authority. The present appeal is in respect of the impugned order passed by the Commissioner(Appeals).