9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favor of appellant. - E/2736/2007 - A/61841/2016-EX[DB] - Dated:- 29-12-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Sh. Astha Gupta, Advocate for the Respondent Sh. Satyapal, A.R. for the Appellant ORDER Per Devender Singh Appellants are in appeal against the impugned order dated 23.07.2007 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Jalandhar (Hqrs at Chandigarh). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are holder of Central Excise Registration and are engaged in the marketing and warehousing of petroleum products. The appellants received excise bonded petroleum products and cleared the same on payment of Central Excise Duty from their re-warehousing ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... integra as the same has been decided by this Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad 2010-TIOL-235-CESTAT-BANG and the case of Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. vs. CCE, Chennai 2010 (261) ELT 695 (Tri.-Chennai). 4. The Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. Heard the parties and examined the records. 6. We find that the issue of valuation of the petroleum products cleared from their terminal point to company owned and company operated (COCO) outlets is no longer res integra and has been decided by this Tribunal in the case laws relied upon by the Advocate of the appellants. In the case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad (supra) , it was held as below ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the present case, the value has been adopted in terms of APM, this has to be accepted. However, another contention taken by the appellant is that the demands are barred by time as the entire facts were known to the department and the prices were fixed in terms of the APM, is a well taken ground. They have been filing declarations and all other details were known to the department. The period in question pertains to February 2000 to November 2001, while the show cause notice has been issued on 12.01.2004, therefore, the demands are also barred by time. The appellants succeed both on merits and time bar. Appeal is allowed with following ratio of the above decision, we set aside the impugned and the appeal is allowed with consequential relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
