9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in accordance with CAS-4. Therefore, the objection raised by audit is not correct as the goods were consumed under Notification No. 67/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 and in these cases value of goods cannot be determined under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable goods) Rules, 2000. Valuation - captive consumption - whether the assessee has failed to include the cost of packing materials in respect of Sponge iron captively consumed? - Held that: - the cost of packing materials has already been taken in excess when compared to the assessable value of packing material according to Audit Report - the charges made in the show cause notice regarding Undervaluation of the Sponge Iron captively used and there-by va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g for Revenue as well as Shri H.V. Ghirnikar, ld. Chartered Accountant representing the respondent-assessee. 3. The first issue in the instant case is whether the assessee has undervalued the goods i.e. Sponge iron by not including the profit element. We find that in the impugned order, the Commissioner has elaborately discussed this issue and has come to the finding that the assessee has determined the value of goods for captive consumption appropriately. The findings of the Commissioner in this regard are reproduced below:- "7.1 The issue involved in the case relates to the interpretation of Rule 9 and 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000; therefore it would be expedient to reproduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation - For captive consumption in one's own factory, valuation would be done as per rule 8 of the Valuation Rules i.e. the assessable value will be 115% of the "cost of production" of the goods. If the same goods are partly sold by the assessee and partly consumed captively, the goods sold would be assessed on the basis of "transaction value" [provided they meet the conditions of Sec. 4(1)(a)] and the goods captively consumed would be valued as per Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules. This is because, as per new Section 4, transaction value has to be determined for each removal. Where goods are transferred to a sister unit or another unit of the same company valuation will be done as per the proviso to Rule 9. 7.3.1 This Circular applies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the transaction value which has also been taken as basis for valuation of the said goods cleared for captive consumption. Even the costing data in form CAS-4 submitted by the Noticee subsequent to audit objection reveal prices of the Sponge Iron for captive consumption is higher than the cost of production as per CAS-4 standard +10%. As per CAS-4 for the financial year 2005-06, 304304.230MT of Sponge Iron captively consumed by Noticee and cost of production of Sponge Iron comes to ₹ 4973/- PMT and +10% added to the cost the transfer value comes to ₹ 5470/- PMT which includes the packing charges in their CAS-4, as per Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 and availed benefit of Notification No. 67/1995-CE NT dated 16.3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
