HIMALAYAN PIPE INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When these appeals came up for hearing we find that there is an application for adjournment at the instance of the Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. After going through the papers and after hearing learned DR we felt that it was not necessary to adjourn the case as the issue raised herein is covered in favour of the appellant by certain decisions of this Tribunal. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeals on merits.

(2.) The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of HDPE pipes and tubes and spinkler systems falling under Chapters 39 and 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants are selling the above goods to various Government departments as per rates and conditions finalised by the Director General of Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi. The rates were inclusive of all taxes and were FOR destination at consignee's premises/rail head. The appellants supplied the goods, as per different supply orders to various places. They claimed deductions on account of freight incurred by them from the factory premises to the consignee's end from the contracted prices in addition to the taxes. The adjudicating authority took the view that in all these cases the sales took place at the consignee's end and therefore, the appellants are not entitled to claim abatement in respect of the freight. The appeals filed by them were dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for non -compliance with the direction to make pre -deposit.

(3.) A common issue arising in these appeals before us is whether sale by the appellant to different Government departments took place at the factory gate of the appellant or at the buyer's place. The tests that are to be applied to examine where sale and purchase as defined in Section 2(h) of the Central Excise Act have taken place, have been elaborately discussed in our order in Associated Strips Ltd. v. CCE New Delhi [2002 (143) E.L.T. 131 (T) = 2002 (49) RLT 506]. The ratio in the above decision was later followed by us in a subsequent order in Frexton India v. CCE [2002 (142) E.L.T. 694 (T) = 2002 (49) RLT 501]. The appeal filed by the Revenue from this decision was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 6 -9 -2002 reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. A102 (S.C.) = 2002 (52) RLT F5.