9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 533X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the assessments provisional in as much as the assessments at the end of M/s. GSK were provisional. They were aware of the said fact as also of the fact that the assessable value at the appellants' end has to be based upon the value of the raw-materials manufactured by M/s. GSK and supplied by them. As such, the entire facts were in the knowledge of the Revenue. As soon as the provisional assessments at the end of M/s. GSK were finalised, the Central Excise authorities having jurisdiction over the appellants' factory also finalised their assessments. As such, finalisation has to be held as having been done by the Central Excise officers after verifying all the facts at the appellants' end as also at the end of M/s. GSK. The said final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. GSK was not known at the time of their removal, and their assessments were kept provisional were being finalised at the end of each financial year. In as much as the cost of the raw-materials, being supplied by M/s. GSK was provisionally assessed and as the assessable value of the appellants' product was dependent upon the cost of raw-materials, the assessments were kept provisional at appellants' end also. After finalisation of the cost of production of the raw-materials at the end of M/s. GSK, the appellants provisionally assessed clearances for the years 2000, 2001 and 2002 were finalised by their Central Excise authorities on 30.03.2002, 31.03.2002 and 09.06.03 respectively. The said finalisation of the assessment was done af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty is missing in this case. In this connection, I note that I have discussed in detail in the foregoing paras as to how the Noticee had intentionally got their provisional assessments finalised by submitting wrong information / datas duly certified by the Cost Accountant and there was no reason for the department to doubt the same. The facts were only revealed when the Central Excise Preventive Staff, pursuant to an intelligence report, conducted detailed investigations in the matter and the subject evation of duty was detected. Therefore, I find that the extended period of limitation has correctly be invoked for demand and recover of the said Central Excise duty. It can be inferred from a judicious consideration of event spectrum that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the provisional assessments at the end of M/s. GSK were finalised, the Central Excise authorities having jurisdiction over the appellants' factory also finalised their assessments. As such, finalisation has to be held as having been done by the Central Excise officers after verifying all the facts at the appellants' end as also at the end of M/s. GSK. The said finalised assessments never stands appealed against by the Revenue and as such have attained finality. In this scenario, invocation of longer period of limitation against the appellants on the ground that they got the assessments finalised from the Central excise authorities by mis-representing the facts cannot be appreciated. 7. In view of the above, we agree with the L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
