Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Excise Duty

Small tobacco pouches weighing less than 10 grams not subject to RSP based assessment

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2016 taxguru.in 313
Case Name
CCE , Delhi Vs M/s Shakti Zarda Factory (India) Pvt. Ltd. (CESTAT Delhi)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement


[Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 101/CE/D-II/2013 dated 03/05/2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise Commissionerate, New Delhi and No. 48-CE/DLH/2007 dated 30/03/2007 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Delhi II.]

Brief of the case:

The New Delhi bench of CESTAT in the above cited case held that tobacco manufactured and packed in small pouches of 6-7 grams and again packed in a bigger packet are not subject to valuation based on retail price as the small pouches weighing less than 10 gms are exempt from requirement of fixation of retail sale price under Rule 34 of the Standards of Weight & Measurement Act.

Facts of the case:

  • The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of chewing tobacco. in pouches of 6 gms. and 7 gms. These are then packed in multiples of 52/42/40/32 pouches in a plastic bag and are cleared on sale. Revenue pointed out that since the small pouches containing 6 gms. and 7 gms. are together put in a bigger pouches, the entire product should be considered as multi-piece packages covered by the MRP Regulations in terms of Standards of Weights & Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rules,1977.
  • The adjudicating authority in its order assessed such clearance at retail sale price as per Sec 4A of the Central Excise Act and accordingly, confirmed a demand for Rs. 12,02,410/- and imposed equal penalty.
  • On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) , the appeal of assessee was allowed who held that the products sold by the respondent is not a multi-piece package . The individual pouches containing 6 gms. and 7 gms. Of chewing tobacco are not governed by the SWM Rules in view of the exemption under Rule 34 of the said Rules. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue filed appeal before tribunal.

Contention of the Assessee:

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Saurabh Chokhra
Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Location: Hyderabad, Telangana
Articles Published: 243

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.