RAJDOOT PAINTS LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are engaged in the manufacture of paints. Their sales are ex -depot. Therefore, they claimed various deductions from the depot price as under : -

(2.) THE assessment related to the period subsequent to amendment of Section 4 w.e.f. 28 -9 -1996 which incorporated Sub -section 4(4)(b)(iii) so as to expand the definition of "place of removal". The amendment incorporated under Sub -section 4(4)(b)(iii) reads as under : -

(3.) THE appellants' claim for deduction was on the basis that they were incurring freight for delivery of the goods from the depot to the local distributor/dealer. The lower authorities refused the claim for deduction on the ground that the appellants have declared depot as the place of removal of excisable goods and the sale is conducted through the depots. Therefore, depot prices are to form the assessable value. The Assistant Collector further held as under : -