ORDER:
1. Brief facts of the case are that on 21st February 1990, the Deputy Superintendent, Vigilance and Inspection (Central Excise and Sales Tax), Lahore, visited the appellants' unit and reported that they, during the period July, 1985 to June, 1989 had cleared and removed a quantity of 14,20,891 kg of soap stock at different prices instead of @ Rs. 3.60 per kg determined by the Central Board of Revenue vide its letter C. No. 2(13)STR/'84 dated 11th November, 1984 and evaded payment of sales tax of Rs. 3,10,868/-. They were, therefore, charged with the contravention of the relevant provisions of the Central Excises Rules, 1944 read with section 3(4) of the Sales Tax Act, 1951. The learned Collector of Central Excise and Sales Tax, MuItan, ordered payment of the alleged evaded amount of sales tax vide order dated 18th April, 1994, subject matter of the present appeal.
2. The appellants have challenged these orders on the following grounds:-
(i) The Central Board of Revenue was not competent to lay down the assessable unit price of Rs.
3.60/kg as the law does not so authorise it in any way. The letter of the Central Board of Revenue dated 11th November, 1984 could at best be taken as advisory in nature. Realizing the mistake, the Central Board of Revenue itself changed its earlier stand vide letter dated 30th September, 1990 specifically mentioning that "fixed assessable value will either favour one factory or put the other at a disadvantage."
(ii) As the show-cause notice itself is based on CBRs letter dated 11th November, 1984, the subsequent proceedings initiate against them are automatically rendered null and void.
(iii) The assessable price of soap-stock at a given point of time is contingent upon a number of vital factors, such as the quality, kind and marketing conditions etc. Which vary from one manufacturer to the other. That being so, the fixation of assessable price for the purpose of computing sales tax would, therefore, otherwise also look illogical.
(iv) There are dozens of cases decided by the Adjudicating/Appellate and Revisional Authorities wherein they accepted prices ranging between Rs. 1.25/kg to Rs. 2.50/kg in identical situation.
3. After seeing the case-record and careful consideration of the arguments advanced by the appellants, the Tribunal is of the considered view that it was not fair to fix assessable price of Rs.
3.60/kg because section (4) of the Central Excises and SaIt Act, 1944 read with Section 3(4) of the Sales Tax Act, 1951 did not vest any such authority in the Central Board of Revenue. It was therefore, mandatory on the part of the Sales Tax Department to proceed strictly in line with the norms of valuation laid down in the aforesaid provisions of law which do give due weight to factors such as "the goods being of like kind and quality and the marketing conditions". Unfortunately, this basic requirement was straightaway brushed aside and the price was arbitrarily determined which step obviously cannot stand the test of judicial scrutiny. As the appellants have brought on record irrefutable evidence of assessm ent of identical goods at prices far lower than Rs. 3.60 per kg. It is feIt that in their case justice has not been meted out.
4. Considering, therefore, the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal orders that, in the instant case the assessm ent should be finalized taking Rs. 1.70 per kg as the assessable unit price for the purpose of computing tax liability for the period involved.
5. The appeal stand disposed of accordingly.