2006 (6) TMI 346 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Costing method dispute between the assessee and Revenue.

In this case before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, the applicants, who have three factories in Gujarat, manufactured san resin at their Kalol factory and transferred it to their sister concerns, claiming Modvat credit on duty paid. The dispute revolves around the costing method adopted by the assessee. The assessee used the costing for the last quarter, while the Revenue insisted on costing for the current quarter. Both parties failed to provide any specific rule or instruction regarding the period for costing. The applicant's advocate referred to the Board's instruction suggesting the use of the previous year's profit margin for determining values under costing rules. The advocate argued that the exercise was revenue neutral. On the other hand, the Revenue's representative contended that costing should be done for each individual consignment, differing from the Commissioner's order. The Revenue supported the Commissioner's decision.

The Tribunal, comprising Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram and Shri S.S. Sekhon, found that the applicants had made a prima facie case for a full waiver of the pre-deposit requirement and a stay on recovery pending the regular appeal hearing. Consequently, the application was disposed of accordingly. The judgment did not delve into the merits of the costing method dispute but focused on the procedural aspect of granting relief to the applicants pending the appeal hearing.