9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 991. While remanding the case back to the original authority he directed that a special audit be conducted by Assistant Director (Cost) to arrive at the appropriate assessable value. The Commissioner (A) further directed that on receipt of such a report (Assistant Director Costs report) provisional assessments be finalised and duty liability determined. This direction of the Commissioner is dated 23-10-2003. The matter pertained to April, 1988 to June, 1990 in appeal No. E/3393/03 and April, 1990 to July, 1991 in appeal No. E/3392/03 before us. 2. In a nutshell the facts are as follows : During the relevant time the appellants manufactured goods falling under Chapter Headings 3402.90 and 3202.00. They had captively consumed products na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Department s appeal is restricted only on a singular finding in acceptance of the prices claimed by the appellant that Assistant Director (Cost) had conducted cost audit on 21-10-1991 and had sent his report on 30-3-1992 to the Divisional Assistant Commissioner wherein he had reworked out the cost of the product slurry and Naphtha and requested to examine the matter in detail and recover the duty under intimation to audit. The Department s appeal is that similar action should be taken for the other periods also, but the Dy. Commissioner has not taken cognizance of the cost audit report and summarily approved price lists finally at the prices claimed/declared therein by the Respondents . 3. From the records of the case it is observe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion surrendered in 1999. The Commissioner (A) should have confined himself to the prayer of the Dept. instead of trading new grounds to remand the matter. 7. There are other issues also in the appeal before the Commissioner (A) such as computation of value of clearances and determination of value of final products as alleged in the show cause notices listed from Sr. Nos. VII to XIII in the order of the Dy. Commissioner. He did not deal with them in any manner. 8. In fine we observe that the order of Commissioner (A) needs to be set aside for two reasons : (a) The cost audit report dated 21-10-1991 covered the period up to that point of time. All the show cause notices issued in regard to determination of prices of captively consu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
