9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed by way of remand. - E/2637/06 - A/87023/17/EB - Dated:- 24-4-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri. M.H. Patil, Advocate with Shir. C.S. Biradar, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. N.N. Prabhudesai, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER Per Ramesh Nair The fact of the case is that appellant are engaged in manufacture of Audio Cassettes and CDs. In the investigation of the departmental officers and visits of M/s. Amitabh Bachchan Corporation Ltd(M/s. ABCL) revealed that they were dealers/traders of pre-recorded audio cassettes and CDs, which were got manufactured from different duplicators such as appellant/M/s. Tarana Music Tapes Pvt Ltd and other namely M/s. Amso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e quality and the MRP as printed on inlay cards. Thus, the transaction between M/s. ABCL and the duplicators cannot be termed as normal sale and the value at which the duty has been paid by the said duplicators cannot be termed as the correct assessable value, in terms of Section 4(i)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, for payment of Central Excise duty. On this contention, officers seized 42400 audio cassettes (of various titles) involving Central Excise duty, amounting to ₹ 22,353.00 from godown of M/s. ABCL. Thereafter show cause notice dated 19-12-1997 was issued demanding excise duty of ₹ 22,353.00 on seized audio cassettes 42400 numbers total valued at ₹ 2,79,416/- In the show cause notice penalty under Section 11AC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... io cassettes etc. manufactured on job work basis. However, the method of arriving at the assessable value has not been accepted by the Tribunal and for the purpose of re-computation of duty the matter has been remanded for re-working of the demand in the light of CBEC Circular No.619/10/2002-CX dated 19-2-2002. Ld. Commissioner in the denovo adjucation passed following order : 1) I confirm the demand of Central Excise duty totally amounting to ₹ 7,61,291/- [i.e. duty of ₹ 13,432/- on the seized goods as per the show cause notice dated 19-12-1997 ₹ 7,47,850/- as per Show Cause Notice dtd 02.01.1998] under Rule 9 (2) of the Central Excise Rules,1944 read with Section 38A and Section 11A of the Central Excise Act,1944 aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Central Excise, Mumbai 2015 (319) E.L.T. 364 (S.C.)] , wherein assessee's appeal was allowed. As per the said decision the royalty cannot be added in the assessable value of CDs. Therefore the order passed by the adjudicating authority relying on the earlier Tribunal order is not proper as subsequently the said order was appealed against before the Hon ble Supreme Court. The Hon ble Supreme Court judgment has set aside the order of the Tribunal order therefore now the case deserves to be decided on the basis of Hon ble Supreme Court judgment. 3. On the other hand, Shri. N.N. Prabhudesai, Ld. Superintendent (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
