AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In C.A. No. 11588/1995 :
In view of the order of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 6391 of 1995 (Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Bhopal Bottling Co.), dated November 13, 2002, this appeal is dismissed.
In C.A. Nos. 2513-16/2000 & 6110/2000 :
In these appeals filed by the Revenue, two questions arise for consideration : (1) whether the extended period u/s 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is rightly invoked; and (2) whether the container hire charges collected by the respondents from their marketing agents could be included in the assessable value of the goods (aerated water).
Insofar as the first point is concerned, the notice to show cause was issued on June 6, 1997 with regard to the period from 1-3-1994 to 30-11-1996. This is clearly barred by limitation. Therefore, Section 11A was invoked to take advantage of extended period. However, the Tribunal found that the respondents-assesses had already informed collecting of the said charges in March, 1994, so there is no case to invoke Section 11A.
In any event, the second point referred to above is covered by the following judgments of this Court in Collector of Central Excise, Madras v. Indian Oxygen Ltd. , Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. v. CCE [1997 (94) E.L.T. 13] and Vijayaivada Bottling Co. Ltd. v. CCE [1997 (94) E.L.T. 433] .
On both these grounds, these appeals fail and are, accordingly, dismissed.
No costs.
In C.A. No. 2943/2000 :
In view of the order just passed in Civil Appeal No. 2513-2516/2000 and connected matter, this appeal is liable to be dismissed. It is, accordingly, dismissed.
No costs.