EASTERN SAFETY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RANCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THE Appellants supplied Footwears to Bihar Home Guards, Patna and claimed Nil rate of duty under sub -heading No. 6401.12 as according to them the value of the footwear did not exceed Rs. 75/ - per pair. It is the contention of the appellants that the impugned goods were notified under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and, therefore, the maximum value appearing under sub -heading No. 6401.12 is required to be determined under sub -section (2) of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

(3.) SHRI B.N. Chattopadhyaya, Ld. Consultant appearing for the appellants states that the sub -Section 2 of Section 4A clearly provides that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 4, the value shall be MRP less abatement and that by Notification No. 40/97 -C.E. (N.T.), dated 27 -8 -97, abatement of 50% on the retail sale price was admissible in respect of the impugned goods. He, further, states that Bihar Home Guards is a Govt. organization and since the price of the footwears is based on the contract and no other charges were realized from the customers, the same has to be treated as the final maximum retail sale price realized from the customers and applying the abatement of 50% notified by the Govt. under Notification No. 40/97 -C.E. (N.T.), dated 27 -8 -97, the value of the impugned goods comes to Rs. 55.86p. and hence the same is clearly below Rs. 75/ - stipulated under the sub -heading No. 6401.12.