9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (5) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Roll Forming Pvt. Ltd. for waiver of pre-deposit of duty Rs. 33.80 lacs penalty of an equal amount under Section 11A of the Act. 2. The Advocate for M/s. SRC Roll Forming Pvt. Ltd. explains that it was a job worker for Mahindra. It received steel sheet and fabricate them into parts for light commercial vehicle. Duty was paid on the value of raw material and job charges. In the impugned order the Commissioner has found short payment of duty in that various elements were not included in the assessable value as below. 3. A sum of Rs. 24.47 lacs is demanded on account of the difference in the cost of material. Applicant declared the value of raw material on the basis of a Chartered Accountant s certificate furnished by Mahindra, which had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved was prior to enactment of this section. Financial hardship is claimed on the ground that applicant on 31-3-1998 had a loss of Rs. 3 crores. A receiver has also been appointed and suit filed by Bank recovery of the loan given by it. However as the gesture bona fide he offered deposit Rs. 2.00 lacs. 5. The Departmental Representative contends that at no time did the applicant inform the department that the Chartered Accountant s certificate did not reflect the actual value of the goods. Applicant has not been able to show that the value declared was an average, by showing cases the declared value was higher than the actual cost. The ambiguous wording in the Chartered Accountant s certificate and the applicants avoiding mentioning the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have to be amortised also has to be taken into account. The balance sheet for 1997-98 of SRC Roll shows losses Rs. 3.37 crores it is stated that accumulated loss due to the fact that the applicant for 5 years losses cannot be shown it is economic liability taking this account and taking note where the pre-deposit of question of applicant to deposit Rs. 3.00 lacs. 9. We do not find a prima facie case for Mahindra. The invoice does not show that duty was paid and that the purchase order does not mention excise duty is to be reimbursed. The fact that the certificate was provided by Mahindra to SRC Roll is significant and cannot be overlooked while it may be true that the duty is payable of SRC Roll available as credit. That by itself does no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
