9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Khandeparkar, President (Oral)]. - This appeal arises from order dated 1-2-2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal. By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order passed by the original authority. The Assistant Commissioner, Bhopal by his order dated 30-9-2004 has confirmed the duty liability to the tune of Rs. 3,29,821/- along with interest thereon and had imposed penalty of equal amount against the appellants. 2.The appellants are engaged in manufacture and clearance of envelops of reinforced paper classifiable under sub-heading 4817.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and reinforced paper sheets classifiable under sub-heading 4807.10 of the said Act. The envelops are not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue. As per the valuation rules then in force, the cost construction method of any excisable goods was only to be adopted when there were no sales by the same party of the comparable goods of the same quality and specifications etc. (ii) On the basis of the details of reels captively consumed and also sold to independent buyers during the disputed period as furnished by the party now before me, I find that there had in fact been sales of the same comparable goods sold to independent buyers. There has also not been any allegation that the said goods were sold to any favoured buyers so as to avail the benefit of lower valuation in respect of the captively consumed goods under dispute. If that be so, as held at para 4 of CEGAT's decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the decision in that regard of the Tribunal being relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals), we find no case for interference therein. Merely because in comparison to the quantity of the captively consumed goods the comparable instances were less in quantity that would not be a justification to ignore the price element therein once it is not in dispute that such sales were to the independent buyers. Besides the difference is only a marginal difference that to relates to the labour charges for converting the reels into sheets. Being so, the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in setting aside the order passed by the adjudicating authority and allowing the appeal. 6. For the reasons stated above, therefore, we do not find any rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
