9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hree buyers is different. There is also no allegation that the job work was undertaken within the factory. Goods have to be assessed in the form in which they are cleared from the factory. In this case, there is no allegation by the Revenue and no evidence brought up to show that price is not ex-factory as far as the rejected slabs are concerned. When the place of removal is factory and no additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yment of duty. The appellant is a 100% EOU. A dispute has arisen in respect of three buyers as regards the assessable value to be adopted. 2. As a result of reassessment, the appellant was required to pay differential duty of ₹ 5,06,570/- with interest and penalty was also imposed. 3. The learned Counsel submitted that the appellant had undertaken edge cutting, rounding, cutting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion and it has to be added to the assessable value. Further, he also submits that the concept under Central Excise is now that the value should be transaction value and in the case of these three customers, the transaction value has to include with so-called job work charges also. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. According to 'Explanation' to Section 4(1) of Cent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yers is different. There is also no allegation that the job work was undertaken within the factory. Goods have to be assessed in the form in which they are cleared from the factory. In this case, there is no allegation by the Revenue and no evidence brought up to show that price is not ex-factory as far as the rejected slabs are concerned. When the place of removal is factory and no additional con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
