9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 781 - AT - Central ExciseValuation of goods - short payment of excise duty - place of removal - Revenue was of the view that the appellant has not followed the provisions of Rule 2 3 4 and 7 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules 2000 at the time of removal of goods to its depot resulting a short payment of Central Excise duty of 66, 907/- for the period February to March 2015 - Silicon Manganese is simultaneously sold from the factory/place of manufacture itself that too the major portion of the manufacture and it is only the part produced which has been shifted to Depot for further sale to the buyers HELD THAT - The issue decided in the case of M/S. VANDANA GLOBAL LIMITED VERSUS C.C.E. RAIPUR 2018 (11) TMI 969 - CESTAT NEW DELHI where on identical facts it was held that The transaction value in the present case is the value at which the Silicon Manganese has been sold by the appellant at its factory gate while transferring the unsold portion thereon to the Depot. There is no question of short payment of duty - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Central Excise Valuation Rules regarding the determination of transaction value. 2. Application of Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules in cases of goods transferred to a depot for further sale. 3. Relevance of previous Tribunal decisions in similar cases for establishing legal precedence. Analysis: 1. The primary issue in this case revolved around the interpretation of Central Excise Valuation Rules concerning the determination of transaction value. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing activities, faced a demand for short payment of Central Excise duty due to alleged undervaluation of goods transferred to their depot. The Revenue contended that the appellant did not adhere to the provisions of Rule 2, 3, 4, and 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, resulting in a short payment of duty. The dispute centered on whether the appellant correctly valued the goods transferred to their depot for further sales, leading to the demand raised by the Revenue. 2. The application of Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules was another crucial aspect addressed in this judgment. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Rule 7, which apply when excisable goods are transferred to a depot or another location for sale after removal from the factory. The Tribunal emphasized that Rule 7 is invoked when goods are not sold at the time and place of removal but are transferred to a different location for sale. In this case, since the appellant was selling a major portion of the manufactured goods directly from the factory itself and only transferring a part to the depot, the Tribunal concluded that Rule 7 was inapplicable. The judgment highlighted the importance of correctly applying valuation rules based on the specific circumstances of each case. 3. The relevance of previous Tribunal decisions in similar cases was also a significant factor considered in this judgment. The appellant cited a previous Tribunal order that favored them in a similar issue, which influenced the Tribunal's decision. The Tribunal referred to the previous order that clarified the correct application of valuation rules in cases where goods are both sold at the factory and transferred to a depot for further sales. By relying on the legal precedence established in the earlier case, the Tribunal concluded that the impugned order was not sustainable and set it aside, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. In conclusion, the judgment provided a detailed analysis of the issues related to the interpretation of Central Excise Valuation Rules, the application of Rule 7 in cases of goods transferred to a depot, and the significance of previous Tribunal decisions in establishing legal precedence for similar matters. The decision favored the appellant based on the specific circumstances and legal principles discussed in the judgment, highlighting the importance of correctly applying valuation rules in excise duty matters.
|
