9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terial supplier are related persons for the purpose of attracting Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000. Even if any additional duty was payable the same was also available as credit to the recipient of goods. It is an exercise entirely covered by the concept of revenue neutrality, as per the case laws relied upon by the respondent. - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.E/54/2007-DB; E/Cross/25/2007 - Order No. A/11326/2014 - Dated:- 1-7-2014 - MR. M.V. RAVINDRAN AND MR. H.K. THAKUR, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Hardik Modh, Adv. For the Respondent : Dr. Jeetesh Nagori, Addl.Commissioner (AR) JUDGEMENT Per: H.K. Thakur 1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue for setting aside the OIO No.18/COMMR/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he respondent argued that in the case of a job worker Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000 is not applicable, which is meant for a situation of captive consumption of goods. That the valuation of the goods in the present case is required to be done under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000 in the light of Apex Court s judgment in the case of Ujjagar Prints (supra) and Pawan Biscuits Co. Pvt.Ltd. (supra) which has also been clarified by CBEC vide Circular No.6/9/10/2002-CX, dt.19.02.2002. It was also his case that since the duty paid or payable by the respondent was available as credit to M/s AIA Engineering, therefore, no intention to evade duty can be attributed on the part of the respondent and extended period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of goods manufactured by the respondent on job work for M/s AIA Engineering. As per the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ujjagar Prints (supra) and Pawan Biscuits (supra) the valuation of goods manufactured in the case of a job worker has to be based on the cost of the raw materials supplied plus the job charges which also include the profit of the job worker. That is what has been clarified by the CBEC vide Circular No.619/10/2002-CX, dt.19.02.2002 and respondent has correctly paid duty. No evidence has been introduced by the Revenue as to how job worker and the raw material supplier are related persons for the purpose of attracting Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000. Even if any additional duty was payabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
