2015 (9) TMI 1264 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit of duty - Determination of assessable value of manufactured goods cleared to their sister concern on payment of duty - penalty u/s 11AC - Held that - Tribunal by its order dated 6th March, 2008 remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for verification of the appellant s claim on the availability of sale price of goods and to determine the assessable value in accordance with the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in Ispat Industries Ltd. case (2007 (2) TMI 5 - CESTAT, MUMBAI). After carrying out necessary verification, the adjudicating authority dropped the demand wherever the Appellant could produce the evidence of sale to independent buyers but confirmed the demand wherever the appellant could not substantiate the availability of sale price to independent buyers by producing relevant sales invoices. - to meet the end of justice, it is prudent to remand the case to the adjudicating authority for deciding the issue afresh by taking into consideration all the relevant invoices and other evidences that would be produced by the appellant during the course of adjudication so as to ascertain whether during the relevant sale price to independent buyers were available. It is also directed that the appellant would deposit ₹ 5.00 Lacs as offered by them within a period eight weeks and report compliance directly to the Commissioner. - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty under Section 11AC of CEA,1944.

Analysis:
The judgment involves applications seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty imposed under Section 11AC of CEA,1944. The demands were confirmed against the Applicants for the period 2002-2003 to 2004-2005 due to their failure to produce necessary evidence of sale of goods to independent buyers. The Ld. Advocate argued that all sales invoices were produced but not considered by the Adjudicating Authority. He requested an opportunity to establish that independent sale prices of goods were available. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue acknowledged that, upon scrutiny, sale prices were available in most cases but insisted on a detailed examination. The central issue revolved around the determination of assessable value of goods cleared to a sister concern on payment of duty, with the Revenue advocating Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, while the appellant argued for valuation based on sale price of goods. The Tribunal decided to remand the case to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision, directing the appellant to deposit Rs. 5.00 Lacs and report compliance to the Commissioner within eight weeks. The Commissioner would then proceed with adjudication, ensuring the appellant receives a fair hearing. All issues were kept open, and the appeals were allowed by way of remand.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issue of waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty under Section 11AC of CEA,1944. It highlighted the importance of producing evidence of sale of goods to independent buyers for determining assessable value. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a detailed scrutiny of sales invoices to ensure a fair decision. By remanding the case, the Tribunal aimed to achieve justice by allowing the appellant to present all relevant evidence and have a fresh adjudication. The directive to deposit Rs. 5.00 Lacs and subsequent compliance reporting to the Commissioner ensured procedural fairness in the adjudication process.