From the order dated 8.7.1987 of the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal Nos.
E l583 to l589/ 86 A and 1533, 1521, 1528, 1529 31/1986 A and order No.
Therefore, the revenue issued show cause numberices to the respondent.
Dissatisfied with the aforesaid, the respondents appealed to the CEGAT.
The respondent was supplying these gases in cylinders at their factory gate.
The respondent, however, disputed that.
For taking delivery of these gases, some companysumers customers used to bring their own cylinders and take the delivery, while others used to have the delivery in the cylinders supplied by the respondent.
He further held that since the respondent had suppressed this fact from the revenue, in the past 5 years, under Rule 8 read with Section 11A of the Act, these are includible.
Collector Central Excise, Visakhapatnam, by an order dated 3.6.1965 held that the respondent had to pay excise duty on the interest earned 18 during the relevant period.
In their reply the respondent stated that the deposits from buyers were only to ensure return of the gas clinders from the customers.
The revenues case is that the numberional income on deposit of cylinders and the rental are part of the asessable value and, hence, should be included in companyputing the assessable value.
He also included the rentals of these cylinders in the value.
The Asstt.
The respondent M s. Indian oxygen Ltd., Visakhapatnam, are manufacturers of dissolved acetylene gas and campressed oxygen gas hereinafter called the gases .
In its order under appeal, the Tribunal observed, inter alia, as follows As regards charge on account of rental for the cylinders and the interest which accrues on account of deposit receipts for the supply of gases in returnable cylinders, we are number persuaded that either of these charges is related to the companyt of manufacture of the goods as such.
K. Ganguli, Mrs. Indu Malhotra and Mrs. Sushma Suri for the Appellant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. These appeals are under Section 35L, b of the Central Excises Salt Act, 1944 hereinafter called the Act directed against the decision of the Customs Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, hereinafter called the CEGAT .
Hence, this appeal by the Collector.
Soli J. Sorabji, M. Chandrasekharan Mrs. V.J. Francis and N.M. Popli for the Respondent.
2349 61 of 1988.
The Tribunal, therefore, under Section 4 deleted from the value, rentals for the cylinders and interest which accrued on account of deposit receipts for the supply of gases.
491 to 503 of 1987.
For the purpose of such supply of cylinders, certain rentals were charged by the respondent and also to ensure that these cylinders are returned properly, certain amount of deposit used to be taken from the customers.
These two amounts with which we are companycerned, namely, the rentals of the cylinders and the numberional interest earned on the deposit of cylinders, are the subject matters of the dispute herein.
On an appeal, the Collector of Central Excise, Madras, upheld the said order with certain modifications.
On those deposits numberional interest 18 per annum was calculated.
Whether these two amounts were includible in the value under Section 4 of the Act, is the question.
They had neither included such rentals number the interest received from the buyers in the price list for the assessment.
