9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 460X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are engaged in the manufacture of various products of aluminum falling under Chapter 76 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the year 2006-07 and 2007-08, they manufactured the goods on job work basis from the raw materials supplied by M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited. The assessable value of the goods manufactured on job work basis was arrived at by the appellants by taking into account the value of the raw materials and the conversion charges which included the profit of the appellant and duty was discharged accordingly. The goods so manufactured were sent back by them to M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited, who utilized the same captively. 3. Revenue entertained a view that inasmuch as the goods manufactured by them were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses of confirmation of duty and the same stands referred only for imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He also observed that whatever duty appellant had paid, was available as credit to the principal manufacturer, who could have utilizing the same for payment of duty on their final product. As such, the entire exercise was Revenue neutral. Thus, by relying upon the Tribunal decision in the case of K.V. Rao vs. CCE, Vishakhapatanam 2008 (222) ELT 267 (Tri. Bangalore). He held the demand to be barred by limitation. The above order of Commissioner (Appeals) is impugned before us. 5. We have heard Shri R.S. Srova, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue and Shri N.V. Suchak, learned Chartered A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Ujagar Prints have clearly laid down that in such a scenario the value of the final products leaving the factory of the job worker would be the cost of the raw material and the processing charges, which include the profit made by the job worker. There is no dispute that the appellant adopted the said procedure to arrive at the assessable value. 8. Revenue s stand that since the person to whom the goods were transferred i.e. M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited was not selling the goods but was utilizing the same, the assessable value should have been arrived at in the hands of the present appellant at the rate of 110% of the cost of the goods. We reproduce the Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules, 2000 as under :- Where the excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
