9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l duty paid subsequently by way of supplementary invoices - Held that: - it was a case of short payment of duty though it was not intentional and without any allegation of deceit - assessee paid duty on the differential price - allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant - E/1506 & 1507/09 - WZB/AHD/2010 - Dated:- 30-9-2010 - MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER (J) and MR. B.S.V. MURTHY, MEMBER (T) Shri R.S. Srova, JDR, for the Respondent. Mrs. Archana Wadhwa: The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various excisable goods falling under different chapters and clearing the same under the cover of their invoices on the assessable value agreed between them and their buyer in the beginning of each year based ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in the case of CCE C Vadodara Vs. Chloritech Industries reported in 2009 (235) ELT 17 (Guj.) as under: In the case of Chloritech Industries the Hon'ble High Court has decided the case in favour of the party on the ground that neither side to the transaction was aware as to the amount which was to be charged and which was to be paid under the escalation clause on the date when the transaction was entered into and therefore it can not be said that the buyer was liable to pay the amount at the time of clearance of goods. The decision of the High Court is based on the case law of Rucha Engineering which has been set aside by the Apex Court. Further the case law of larger bench in the case of Lucas TVS was not available before the High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Central Excise, Pune Vs. SKF India Ltd. [2009 (239) ELT 385 (S.C.)] to contend that the said provision is applicable on the facts of the present case also. We have perused the said decision and we find that we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the said case applies to the facts of the present case. It is to be noted that in the said decision, the facts were that the assessee had demanded from its customers, the balance of the higher price by virtue of the retrospective revision of the price and therefore, on the date the goods were cleared, the differential duty had to be paid and the same had not been done which was held to be a short payment of duty as the differential duty was paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
