9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finitely, the appellant was liable to pay duty, on amortized cost but same has not been done. - on the cost of amortization, the duty has not been demanded on the final product cleared by the appellant, therefore, the demand of duty on die development charges is not sustainable. - Impugned order is set aside - Decision in the case of Ashok Iron Works Ltd. (2004 (2) TMI 482 - CESTAT, BANGALORE) followed - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/1939/2006-EX(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 52411/2015-EX(DB) - Dated:- 30-7-2015 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Manish Saharan, Advocate : For the Petitioner Shri M.S. Negi, DR : For the Respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esearch and development charges was required to be amortized in their final product but the same has not been done. The lower authorities have neither demanded the duty on account of short payment on finished good for the amortized cost nor proposed in the show cause notice. Therefore, the demand cannot be confirmed on die development charges recovered by the appellant from the customers. To support his contention he relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Ashok Iron Works Ltd. Vs. CCE Belgaum-2004 (168) ELT 198 (Tri-Mum). 4. On the other hand, Ld. AR submits that in that case it is admitted case of the appellant that they have not amortized the cost of die research development charges in the cost of their final product. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts for manufacture of the casting. The number of casting which could have been manufactured from the patterns developed for which developmental charges were recovered was neither ascertained by the department nor the excisable goods which could have been manufactured from such patterns was worked out or called for from the appellants. Duty cannot be directly demanded on the developmental charges as these are not the excisable goods. 7. As in this case also, on the cost of amortization, the duty has not been demanded on the final product cleared by the appellant, therefore, the demand of duty on die development charges is not sustainable. 8. In these terms, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
