9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. E/532/11 M/s Nasik Metaldust Pvt. Ltd. December 2008 to July 2009 Rs.42,526/- Duty: Rs.42,526/- Interest: Rs.2,075/- Appeal No. E/533/11 M/s Powerdeal Energy System (I) Pvt. Ltd. April 2005 to 9th February, 2010 Rs.14,62,392/- Duty: Rs.7,13,791/- Interest: Rs.51,375/- 2. As the issue involved is common in all the cases, therefore, we are disposing the stay application all together. 3. The facts of the case are that the applicants are the manufacture of excisable goods like Sheet Metal parts, Fabricated parts and Control Panel Board etc. It was found that the applicants manufactured the goods as per the drawings and designs supplied by their customers free of cost and the applicants have not included the money value ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty on the cost of raw materials or transaction charges received duty free from the principal manufacturer. Therefore, the applicants were under bona fide belief that the drawings and designs supplied free of cost by the principal manufacturer, who had discharged duty liability on the final product is not includable in the assessable value and hence, the extended period is not invokable. Therefore, he prayed that the stay be granted. 5. The stay applications were strongly opposed by learned A.R. and he submitted that as per the Valuation Rules, 2000, the value of drawings and designs is specifically mentioned to be included in the assessable value, therefore, the contention of the applicants that the value of designs and drawings supplied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usive of the raw materials cost, then the Bhilai Steel Plant could have taken the credit on the duty so paid, or the appellants could have obtained the raw materials free of cost without payment of duty and supplied the bricks back to the Bhilai Steel Plant following the Rule 57F procedure. The appellants have not strictly followed either of the procedures, but they paid duty on the job charges. Therefore, this Tribunal relied on the decision of International Auto Ltd. (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the intermediate manufacturer need not to pay the duty and such a decision has been followed in two other cases and it was held that the appellant need not to pay duty as intermediate manufacturer for the Bhilai Steel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
