Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (10) TMI 157 - AT - Central ExciseLevy of duty as per CAS-4 - CBEC Circular No. 692/08/2003-CX dated 13.2.2003 - Held that - Considering the fact that the issue has already been settled by the Apex Court in the case Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune Vs. Cadbury India Ltd. reported in 2006 (8) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA wherein it was held that for the period prior to 13.02.2003 also that duty is payable as per Board s Circular No. 692/8/2003-CX dt. 13.2.2003. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders, same are upheld - Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
Interpretation of circulars for duty payment on intermediate product value, retrospective application of circulars, compliance with Apex Court judgment. Analysis: The appeal involves a dispute regarding the duty payment on intermediate products cleared by the respondents based on the value determined as per CAS-4. The Revenue contends that duty should be paid on a broader value basis as per Circular No. 258/92/96-CX, including various costs like material, labor, overhead, administrative, advertising, depreciation, and interest. However, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) ruled in favor of the respondents, citing CBEC Circular No. 692/08/2003-CX, which exempts duty payment on advertisement expenses for captively consumed goods. The key contention is the retrospective application of the CBEC Circular dated 13.2.2003 to a period prior to its issuance. The Tribunal, per Ashok Jindal, analyzed the issue in light of the Apex Court's decision in Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune Vs. Cadbury India Ltd., where it was established that duty payment should align with Board's Circular No. 692/8/2003-CX even for periods preceding 13.02.2003. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeals and disposing of the cross-objection accordingly. The judgment emphasizes the precedence of the Apex Court's interpretation in settling the matter and affirms the application of the circular for duty payment on intermediate products.
|