9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me are shown separately as provided u/r 5 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 - in the present case, it is evident that transportation charges are shown separately by the respondent-assessee - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/172609/2007-EX[DB] - A/70144/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 18-1-2017 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rse of scrutiny of records it was observed that the respondent cleared one Locomotive to M/s Rashtriya Chemicals Fertilizers Ltd, Chembur, Mumbai on the strength of Central Excise Invoice No. 89 dated 31/01/2001, and paid Central Excise duty amounting to ₹ 44,40,000/- on the Assessable Value of ₹ 2,77,50,000/-. On scrutiny of the said invoice dated 31/01/2001 issued by respondent-ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Notice dated 13/01/2005, was issued for levying of duty of ₹ 27,788/- on the amount of ₹ 1,73,677/- under the provision of section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act 1944 with further interest and penalty. The Show Cause Notice was adjudicated on contest, confirming the proposed demand with interest and further equal amount of penalty was imposed under Section 11AC, read vvith Rule 25 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n charges are deductible, if the same are shown separately as provided under Rule 5 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. We find that from the admitted facts it is evident that transportation charges are shown separately by the respondent-assessee and accordingly, we find that the Show Cause Notice is misconceived and untenable. Accordingly, we dismi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
