9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 460X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n arrived at in the hands of the present appellant at the rate of 110% of the cost of the goods - appellant is an independent manufacturer who had manufactured the goods out of the raw material supplied by M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited, instead of using its own raw material - Assessee is not the manufacturer and is further consuming the goods captively for his own manufacturing activities - Appeal is rejected - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Dr. P. Babu, JJ. For Appellant : Shri R.S. Srova, JDR For Respondent : Shri N.V. Suchak, Chartered Accountant Per : Mrs. Archana Wadhwa; Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. We have heard Shri R.S. Srova, learned JDR appearing for the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals). The appellate authority has observed that the assessable value has rightly arrived at by the appellant, in terms of the ratio of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Ujagar Prints vs. UOI 1989 (39) ELT 493 (SC), wherein it was held that while valuing the goods produced on job work basis, the assessable value would include the cost of material, processing charge and profit of the producer. He accordingly observed that inasmuch as the goods manufactured by the appellants were not consumed by them captively, the provisions of Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules, 2000 are inapplicable. He accordingly, set aside the demand on merits as also on limitation by observing that neither the show cause notice nor the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value of the excisable goods. Inasmuch as in the present case, the goods manufactured by the job workers were cleared to the premises of the principal manufacturer for captive consumption, the assessable value has to be arrived at in terms of the provisions of Rule 8. The ground advanced by the Revenue also assailed the findings of Commissioner (Appeals) on the point of limitation. 7. Admittedly, the goods were manufactured by the appellant though out of the raw material supplied by M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited , the liability to pay duty on the said goods was on the appellant and not on M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited. Since the goods were not sold by the appellant to M/s. Sai Flipped Coil Pvt. Limited, the sale value of the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
