1998 (1) TMI 221 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Challenge to order-in-original on deductions from Cum-Duty-Price and Modvat credit; Lack of documentary evidence; Remand sought for re-examination; Valuation and Modvat credit issues unsettled.

In the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, filed by M/s. R.K.Y. Industries, the challenge was against the order-in-original dated 11-9-1989 passed by the Addl. Collector, Central Excise, Chandigarh. The appellants contested the deductions from the Cum-Duty-Price and the failure of the Adjudicating Authority to address the request for Modvat credit. The Adjudicating Authority had noted the absence of documentary evidence to support the appellants' claims regarding freight and other charges. The appellants' advocate argued that they had submitted documentary evidence post the personal hearing, seeking a remand for further consideration.

The Respondent, represented by Shri D.S. Negi, SDR, contended that the appellants had not substantiated their claims with documentary evidence, thus opposing any benefit to the appellants at that stage. The appellants' advocate, Shri J.P. Kaushik, referred to various Tribunal decisions supporting the recalculations of duty liability and the extension of Modvat credit even if not initially claimed. He urged for a remand to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh review considering the documentary evidence submitted.

The Tribunal, comprising S/Shri Lajja Ram and S.S. Kang, observed that the appellants had not raised issues of classification or goods produced through job workers. The primary issue was the deductions from the Cum-Duty-Price, with the appellants arguing that the prices at which they sold goods to State Electricity Boards should be considered the Cum-Duty-Price if duty liability existed. The Tribunal noted the lack of findings by the Adjudicating Authority on both the deductions and Modvat credit issues.

Citing the settled law on valuation by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal concluded that a remand was necessary for a re-examination of valuation and Modvat credit aspects. They directed the jurisdictional Adjudicating Authority to re-evaluate these aspects after affording the appellants an opportunity to be heard, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive, appealable order. As no other points were raised, the rest of the order was confirmed, and the appeal was disposed of through remand for further proceedings.