Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2004 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2004 (12) TMI 489 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
- Confirmation of demand of duty and imposition of personal penalties under Central Excise Act, 1944.
- Allegations of trading activity and blending of LPG leading to duty payment disputes.
- Assessment of assessable value based on sales to M/s. Pilot Cooking Gas Ltd.
- Interpretation of statements and invoices regarding LPG transactions.
- Re-examination and remand of the matter for fresh adjudication.

Confirmation of Demand and Penalties:
The Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 55,95,794 against M/s. Silverchem Industries (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. and imposed personal penalties under the Central Excise Act, 1944. Additionally, penalties were imposed on M/s. Pilot Cooking Gas Ltd. and the Director of M/s. Silverchem Industries. The penalties were imposed under specific provisions of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Allegations of Trading Activity and Blending of LPG:
The case involved M/s. Silverchem Industries engaging in the manufacture and trading of Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG). The dispute arose when the Commissioner did not accept the re-sale of LPG as trading activity, requiring duty payment due to blending activities. The appellants argued that blending LPG did not constitute manufacturing, and duty was paid on blended LPG after availing Modvat credit. The disagreement centered on whether the blending activity necessitated duty payment.

Assessment of Assessable Value:
The Commissioner determined the assessable value based on sales to M/s. Pilot Cooking Gas Ltd. The appellants contended that selling LPG in bulk to M/s. Pilot Cooking Gas Ltd. and bottling it on their premises as per agreement did not warrant an increase in assessable value. Discrepancies existed regarding the interpretation of statements, invoices, and the nature of transactions, leading to differing assessments of assessable value.

Interpretation of Statements and Invoices:
The appellants argued that the mere presence of blending facilities did not automatically imply blending activities for all clearances. They maintained that duty was paid on blended LPG and transactions were primarily trading activities. The Commissioner's reliance on statements and lack of verification of M/s. Pilot Cooking Gas Ltd.'s records raised concerns about the accuracy of the assessment.

Re-examination and Remand for Fresh Adjudication:
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a re-examination of the facts, including the agreement between the parties and verification of records. The decision highlighted the importance of a thorough review before making conclusive judgments, refraining from expressing opinions on other issues or limitations at this stage.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates