9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on the appellant to produce the evidences of the value of monitors claimed as deduction by the appellant, instead of accepting the fact that the said value can be ascertained by themselves from the records available in their possession - invoices are not available in one case and not producing in another case itself indicates that department was not serious in arriving at the correct duty liability on the appellants - Following decision of CMS COMPUTERS PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MUMBAI - I [1998 (11) TMI 280 - CEGAT, MUMBAI] - Decided against assessee. - Appeal No.E/552 & 553/11 - - - Dated:- 29-10-2012 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, JJ. For the Appellant: Shri M.A. Patel, Cons. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal and raised the same issue. This Bench vide final order No. A/2525-2527/WZB/AHD/07 dated 27.09.07 in operative portion in paragraph 3 recorded as under: 3. After hearing learned DR, we agree, with the above contention of the learned advocate. The demand of duty is required to be re-quantified by treating the entire realization as cum duty price and by excluding the value of bought out monitors, as held by Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CMS computers cited supra. For the said limited purpose, we remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority, who would also decide about the quantum of penalty afresh. In as much as the issues during the relevant period were doubtful, we do not find any justification in imposition separate pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is their claim that the entire purchase/sales records having been resumed by the department, it was their duty to bring on record said invoices and give them the benefit; instead the lower authorities have cast onus on the appellants to produce the evidences which are already with the department. It is his submission that the appellant has worked out the actual duty liability which is as under and submitted to the lower authorities: Sr. No. Description Silica Computers Data-tech Computers 1 No. of computers sold with monitors 28 24 2 Value on which duty confirmed on computers including value of monitors as per OIO No.19/99 dt.27.09.99 R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -tech Computers for purchase of monitors. 7. We would like to record here that the entire case is based upon the factual matrix as regards the value to be ascertained for the purpose of central excise duty. On perusal of the records, we find that there is no dispute that the appellant is liable to discharge the central excise duty on the computers sold by him. The only bone of contention between the department and the appellants is regarding the reduction of the value of bought out items i.e. monitors. 8. On perusal of the order in original, we find that the appellant had given a chart indicating the value of monitors supplied with computers based upon his understanding of the said value of monitors. We also find from the records that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the absence of any evidence of relied upon documents, which were withdrawn by the Revenue without visiting the appellant s premises despite giving revenue or fair chance for production of the entire set of invoices. We find that serious reply to the direction of bench states that such invoices are not available in one case and not producing in another case itself indicates that department was not serious in arriving at the correct duty liability on the appellants. 10. In sum, in view of foregoing, we hold that the appellant M/s. Silica Computers is liable for confirmation of duty of Rs.79,079/- along with interest and appellant M/s. Data-tech Computers is liable to pay an amount of Rs.78,721/- along with interest under the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
