LAKME LTD. Vs. CCE, MUMBAI-II

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants herein manufacture cosmetics and toilet preparations falling under Chapter 33 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. In the price list for the period January to December 1999 they claimed deduction on account of secondary packing for the purpose of determining the issue of assessable value of the products for payment of duty. These deductions were disallowed by the Assistant Commissioner who held that the nature of packing is generally in unit packs which are thereafter packed in 6 -dozen outer cartons called shippers" and held that the deduction claimed was not permissible and hence confirmed demands of Rs. 4,84,687/ - and Rs. 5,03,044/ -. This order was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), hence this appeal before the Tribunal. None appears for the appellants in spite of notice; hence was heard the learned SDR and perused the records.

(2.) We find that what is most relevant for deciding whether the value of shippers to be included in the assessable value of the cosmetic preparations manufactured and cleared by the appellants is whether it has normal packing in which the goods are cleared from the factory. In this context, it is relevant to note that the lower appellate authority has clearly found that the appellants have not claimed that the goods are normally sold/cleared from the factory without this packing and that this packing was made only at the request of any buyer for the purpose of self transit and transport of the goods. The ratio of the decision of the Apex Court in Geep Industrial Syndicate Ltd, v/s. CCE, 1997 (90) ELT 271 (SC) :, 1997 (69) ECR 232 (SC) wherein has been held that the packing, the cost of which is sought to be included, is packing in which it is ordinarily sold in the course of wholesale trade to the wholesale buyer at the factory gate, is directly applicable to the present case. Therefore, we see no reason for interference with the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and accordingly uphold the same and reject the appeal.