9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 532X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oint CDR represented the department. 3. We heard both sides. 4. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs, which are excisable. They cleared certain goods to their sister concern M/s. Jagadale Industries under stock transfer basis. During the audit of the appellant's records for the period from 2003 onwards, it was observed that they did not discharge the duty liability on the goods stock transferred in terms of Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules by adopting 115%/110% of the cost of the production. Therefore, proceedings were initiated against the appellants. The lower authority apart from confirming the differential duty imposed equal penalty under Section 11AC. Interest was charged and while confirming t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MRF Ltd. v. CCE - 2004 (170) E.L.T. 69 (T) Duty demand on the ground that intermediate products cleared to appellants other unit without including overheads viz., advertisement, interest, etc. - Appellants filed cost account certificate based on instructions available at the time - Whatever duty appellants were paying at the manufacturing unit of intermediate goods, was taken as credit by other unit where these goods were taken for manufacture of finished products - No evidence found that appellants had an intention to evade the payment of duty -Impugned order set aside. 4. T. N. Dadha Pharmaceuticals v. CCE - 2003 (152) E.L.T. 251 (S.C.) Held, to invoke the proviso under Section 11A(1) three requirements have to be cumulatively satisf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n and longer period could not have been invoked. In any case, there was no intention to evade duty, as whatever duty is paid by the first unit or the appellant-unit could have taken as credit in the sister unit. Therefore, it was submitted that the penalty is not leviable. 5. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that the appellants have been filing the returns regularly and furnishing all the information to the department, however, the department has not acted in time. In any case, after the lapse was pointed out to the appellants, they had paid the differential duty. In these circumstances, the penalty is not called for because the whole exercise is revenue neutral. Whatever duty is paid by the appellant is taken as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
