2009 (8) TMI 887 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of job charges and profit margin in manufacturing on job work basis.

Analysis:
The case involved the manufacturing of chlorinated paraffin wax and hydrochloric acid on a job work basis for a specific company. The dispute arose regarding the treatment of job charges and profit margin in the financial transactions between the manufacturer and the company. The Commissioner alleged that the profit margin might have been received separately during a certain period. However, the appellant argued that there was no excess amount received beyond the job charges during the disputed period, and the profit margin was included within the job charges they received. The appellant presented evidence from balance sheets of relevant years to support their claim. The balance sheets clearly showed that the conversion charges received from the company included the profit margin, which was separately indicated for accounting purposes.

The Advocate for the appellant emphasized that the profit margin was not received separately but was part of the conversion charges received for the job work. The Commissioner's finding was reiterated by the Joint Commissioner, but upon careful consideration of the submissions and records, the Tribunal was inclined to agree with the appellant's argument. The Tribunal found prima facie that the profit margin was indeed included in the conversion charges received and accounted for by the appellant. Consequently, the basis for the demand of duty was deemed not sustainable. As a result, the Tribunal held that the appellant had established a case for the waiver of dues as per the impugned order. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to waive the requirement of pre-deposit of dues and stay the recovery of the same until the appeal was disposed of. It was clarified that all the observations made were prima facie views expressed solely for the purpose of deciding the stay application.