Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2006 (12) TMI 46

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CE Rules. However, he has taken a view that the value applicable to the removals for inter unit transfer of excisable goods shall be the price at which such goods are to be sold from their units at other places after their clearance from the place of removal at or about the same time of clearance and, where such goods are not sold at or about the same time, at the lime nearest to the time of removal of goods under assessment. Therefore, he has confirmed the differential duty and imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs under Section 11AC of the CE Act. 2. The appellants' contention is that what was cleared by them were semi-finished goods to their own units. The findings rendered by the Commissioner in the impugned order i.e. semi-finished good .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... discretion of the Bench. 5. On a careful consideration, we notice from the facts alleged in the Show Cause Notice that the appellants had cleared only semi-finished goods. The goods had not attained the fully finished condition. In a circumstance like this, the Commissioner's direction to assess the goods as fully finished goods is not supported by law. The said findings are not sustainable. The goods have to be assessed on the "as in where" basis when they are cleared from the factory to another unit for further manufacture. This view was expressed by this Bench in the case of IFB Automation India Ltd. (cited supra). The findings recorded in Paras 5(d) and 5(e) are reproduced herein below: "(d) Alter carefully going through the relev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n also take it that the incomplete product is used for consumption by him. In either of the cases, the transfer of the goods is squarely covered by Rule 8. The appellants have correctly discharged the duty liability under Rule 8. The Commissioner has given a finding that Rule7 is applicable to the present case. We shall show how Rule 7 is not applicable. We reproduce Rule 7 herein below. "Rule 7 - Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee at the time and place of removal but are transfrrred to a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises (hereinafter referred to as "such other place") from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the place of removal and where the assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates