1998 (11) TMI 261 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Duty demand on purchased items supplied with manufactured goods.
2. Denial of Small Scale exemption due to exceeding qualifying clearance limit.
3. Correct computation of value of clearances for exemption eligibility.

Analysis:
1. The impugned order raised a duty demand of over Rs. 62 lakhs on the appellants, comprising two components: duty on items purchased from outside and supplied with Capacitors manufactured by them, and denial of Small Scale exemption for clearances in the financial year 1991. The appellant argued that the purchased items were separate goods assessable to duty under Central Excise Law and not parts of the Capacitors. Citing legal precedents, including Supreme Court judgments, the appellant contended that the value of these items should not be included in the value of the Capacitors. The Tribunal agreed, setting aside the demand on this count based on established legal principles.

2. Regarding the denial of Small Scale exemption due to allegedly exceeding the qualifying clearance limit, the appellant challenged the computation of clearances for the preceding year, highlighting errors in including the value of Capacitors cleared in the previous year and incorrect deduction of freight. The Tribunal noted that the Capacitors in question were cleared in the earlier year and brought back for inspection before being cleared again in the relevant year. Emphasizing the need for accurate computation as per Central Excise Act provisions, the Tribunal remanded the case for a fresh decision on exemption eligibility based on correct clearance value calculation.

3. The Revenue reiterated the findings on duty demand for purchased items and disputed the need for reworking the value based on freight variations, citing a Supreme Court decision. However, the Tribunal upheld the appellant's arguments, emphasizing that the value of separately purchased items should not be added to the manufactured goods' value. Additionally, the Tribunal supported the appellant's claim for deduction of actual freight in line with contractual terms, directing the correct computation of clearances for exemption determination. The Tribunal also set aside the imposed penalty, deeming it unjustified in the circumstances.