COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PAKISTAN LIMITED, MULTAN versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, MULTAN
Section 12 (4) of the Central Excise Act (I of 1944), Section 4 (2), for the purposes of duty ???? Determination of the value of the air-water refining costs, in the cost price, the condition of excess water when the manufacturing premises. So it was totally different. Of which it was fitted to be used immediately as drinking water, the water bottles, when they left the manufacturing facility, were in a non-cooling state and brought distributors / retailers in the same condition. Only in retail outlets, cooling was implemented, whereby the product was ready for consumption, ie used as a quick beverage, so that the retailing of the activities carried out by the manufacturer. The pricing came to a disputed conclusion under which the manufacturer was bound by the law when the product distributor / retailer When selling to retailers, the only charge to add to the retail price until the stage when the product was not sold is that the manufacturer did not perform the cold activity. The manufacturer could not be burdened with this. It may be compelled to deduct the cost of cooling activities for the return price under section 4 (2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. And legally the manufacturer cannot be burdened with the cost of any activity that was not performed by it; the revenue was mistaken for modifying the retail price fixed by the manufacturer without any activity. Identify the cost of the product which was not covered by the manufacturer while determining retail price.
