2012 (7) TMI 351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d amortization cost is not paid by the appellant and the mould amortization cost is directly paid by M/s PDAP and the appellants were clearing the goods to M/s PDAP on payment of duty. While arriving at the assessable value of the goods cleared to M/s DPAP the mould amortization cost is not taken into consideration by appellant - no infirmity in the impugned order - the same is additional consider .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a Ltd (Domestic Appliances and Personal Care Division) (hereinafter referred to as M/s PDAP for short). As the appellants were clearing the finished goods to M/s PDAP, thus the same is additional consideration flowing to the appellants. 4. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalty. The appellant filed appeal and the same is dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals). .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nished goods to M/s PDAP is an oral contract and appellants were paying duty on the goods manufactured out of the plastic moulds without taking into consideration of the mould amortization cost. Therefore, the demand is rightly made. 7. We find that the appellants are manufacturing goods for M/s PDAP and the plastic mould and components procured from M/s PPMF. M/s PPMF is paying duty after tak .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X