9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowing the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu Vs. Jagannath - [1993 (10) TMI 315 - SUPREME COURT] and no Court shall allow the party to retain the gain made by a person what that was not due to him. Therefore assessee is required to deposit the same even in absence of Section 11D of the CEA,1944. The authority shall verify the deposit particulars and evidence and pass appropriate order on this limited issue only. Revision of cost has no significance when it is supplied by buyer to the assessee not being liable to duty because its finished goods are ultimately exempted which remained undisputed by Revenue. - Decided partly in favour of Revenue. - E/485/2004 - - - Dated:- 27-4-2015 - D N Panda, Mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the buyers had to be adopted and the assessable value of the components to be revised accordingly. 2. The contention of the assessee in so far as the issue in (i) above is concerned that the same is of no relevance because even if included in the assessable value the finished goods are exempted from duty. 3. So far as the issue in (ii) above is concerned contention of the assessee is that the cost of tools used in the manufacture of components being attributable to issue (i) above and this issue has also no consequence to the Revenue. 4. So far as the issue in sl. No. (iii) is concerned, the contention of the assessee is that the money collected from the buyers to the extent of ₹ 6,53,169.36 having been deposited, Section 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... introduction of Section 11D, it is necessary to verify whether this money has gone to the treasury or not. This can be stated following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2005 (181) ELT 328 (S.C.). It may be stated that no one can be enriched at the cost of the state following the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu Vs. Jagannath - AIR 1994 (SC) 853 and no Court shall allow the party to retain the gain made by a person what that was not due to him. Therefore assessee is required to deposit the same even in absence of Section 11D of the CEA,1944. The authority shall verify the deposit particulars and evidence and pass appropriate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
