2018 (3) TMI 1116 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit of cum-duty price - Held that - though the modification application was rejected, but the appellants were directed to raise the above issue before the original adjudicating authority. The appellant having raised the issue, it was obligatory on the part of the original adjudicating authority to give his finding on the same and to re-quantify the demand accordingly - matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for proper adjudication after considering the appellant s plea to allow the cum duty benefit - appeal allowed by wya of remand.

Summary

Issues: Dispute over inclusion of bought out items in assessable value of ice making machine, benefit of SSI exemption notification, imposition of penalties, extension of cum-duty price benefit.

Issue 1: Inclusion of bought out items in assessable value
The appellant, a manufacturer of Ice Making Machines, was in dispute with Revenue authorities regarding the inclusion of the value of bought out items in the assessable value of their final product. The Tribunal in its earlier order rejected the assessee's stand, stating that the value of bought out items must be added to the assessable value. However, the Tribunal accepted the assessee's claim for re-quantification of duty by extending the benefit of SSI exemption notification.

Issue 2: Benefit of SSI exemption notification
The Tribunal, in a subsequent order, directed the appellant to raise the issue of cum-duty price benefit before the original adjudicating authority. In the remand proceedings, the appellant claimed the benefit of cum-duty price based on settled law. However, the original adjudicating authority did not address this issue in the impugned order, focusing instead on allowing the benefit of SSI exemption notification and imposing penalties.

Issue 3: Extension of cum-duty price benefit
The only grievance raised by the appellant in the appeal was the non-extension of the cum-duty benefit to them. The Tribunal, after hearing the arguments, agreed that the law on this issue was settled and that the original adjudicating authority should have given a finding on the cum-duty price benefit and re-quantified the demand accordingly. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority for proper adjudication, emphasizing that the appellant should raise only the issue of cum-duty benefit.

This judgment addresses the disputes related to the inclusion of bought out items in the assessable value of an ice making machine, the benefit of SSI exemption notification, and the extension of the cum-duty price benefit. The Tribunal clarified the obligations of the original adjudicating authority to consider the appellant's plea for the cum-duty benefit, highlighting that the appellant's sole grievance was the non-extension of this benefit. The decision emphasizes the importance of proper adjudication and adherence to settled legal principles in resolving such disputes.