Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1274 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - Revenue entertained a view that inasmuch as the Invoices in question showed the full value of the goods supplied by them, it has to be presumed that the same was inclusive of duty of Excise - demand in terms of Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that - Where an assessee has collected duty of Excise from their customers by representing the same as duty of Excise but has not deposited the same with the Revenue, the said provisions would come into play. In the present case, there is no finding by the Authorities Below that the appellant has collected any amount of Excise duty from their customers, which does not stand deposited by them with the Exchequer. It is noticed that the entire contract was inclusive of all the Taxes required to be paid by the appellant and in such a scenario the lower Authorities have concluded that the contract price being inclusive of Central Excise duty, the appellant is presumed to have collected the duty from their customers - The said observations and findings of the Lower Authorities are not only against the spirit of Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 but are absolutely futile in nature. Admittedly, the appellant has not received any extra amount from the Police by showing the same to be duty of excise, in which case the said section would not be applicable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues: Duty of Excise collection and deposit, interpretation of Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, presumption of duty collection from customers.
Analysis: 1. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing excisable goods, received orders for Body Pouches from the Director General of Police, J&K. The appellant supplied the goods under invoices without separately showing the duty of Excise. The Revenue contended that the full value of goods indicated duty collection, leading to initiation of proceedings. 2. The Revenue alleged that the appellant collected Excise duty from customers but failed to deposit it. A Show Cause Notice was issued, demanding duty payment of ?90,594 under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Original Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), prompting the present appeal. 3. Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, mandates depositing collected duty with the Central Government. The Tribunal noted that if an assessee collects Excise duty but does not deposit it, the provision applies. However, in this case, no evidence suggested the appellant collected duty from customers and withheld it. The contract price included all taxes, leading the Authorities to presume duty collection from customers, a flawed interpretation. 4. The Tribunal found the Authorities' conclusions contrary to the essence of Section 11D. As the appellant did not receive additional amounts from the Police as Excise duty, the provision did not apply. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with relief to the appellant. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the interpretation of Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Tribunal's assessment of duty collection and deposit issues, ultimately leading to the appeal's success for the appellant.
|