9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount of duty involved Amount of penalty inv E/Stay/801/94-A 1. E/1349/94-A Rs.9,17,601.86 75,000/- Rs. E/Stay/802/94-A 2. E/1350/94-A Rs. 45,880.80 3,000/- Rs. E/Stay/742/94-A 3.. E/1274/94-A Rs.14,60,746.94 Rs. 1,00,000/- E/Stay/743/94-A 4.. E/1257/94-A Rs.16,77,374.87 Rs. 1,00,000/- E/Stay/752/94-A 5. E/1295/94-A Rs.30,91,291.29 Rs. 2,00,000/- E/Stay/800/94-A 6. E/1348/94-A Rs.18,05,775.91 Rs. 1,50,000/ 2. The issue is whether or not, the Modvat credit of duty availed is to be included in the assessable value of the goods namely Plastics Articles manufactured by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udgment of the Tribunal in the Incab Industries case itself recently in its Final Order No. 90/94-A, dated 29-4-1994 reported in 1995 (75) E.L.T. 131 (Tri.), where the previous position has been reiterated to the effect that Modvat credit has no direct impact on the assessable value. The ld. Counsel further contended that the demands are barred by limitation being beyond six months and the Department has no grounds for invoking the longer period under Section 11A of the CESA, 1944. For this the ld. Counsel submitted that in the year 1989 there has been an Audit objection regarding their assessable value which has been explained and later dropped. There was also a decision of the Collector (Appeals) in the case of D.J. Plastics on the same i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es case reported in 1985 (20) E.L.T. 179. The ld. DR further relied on Supreme Court s decision of Kirloskar Bros. (supra) to say that abatement to be added to the assessable value. The Incab Industries decision (supra) of the Tribunal in both the times had resulted in remand and the present case is also dis-similar from the Incab situation because it involves assessable value at the hand of job workers. 4. On limitation it was pointed out by the ld. DR that the applicants here had failed to disclose the elements of the costing of their product. The ld. Counsel submitted that the show cause notice and the order of the Collector would themselves indicate that the fact of availing of Modvat credit by the applicant was not in dispute. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
