9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the site of the customer, valuation done should be in accordance with the provisions of Section 4(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The demand for the differential duty from the appellant is unsustainable and liable to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/951/2009 - A/30659/2018 - Dated:- 23-5-2018 - Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And Mr. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri B. Venugopal, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri. M. Chandra Bose, Additional Joint Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. [Order per: M.V. Ravindran] This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 20/2009 (T) CE dated 27.07.2009. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration, after filtering out of unnecessary details are the appellant entered into an agreement with Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company (APSPDCL), Tirupati for conversion of Low Voltage Distribution System into High Voltage Distribution System in certain feeders in Rajampeta division of Kadapa operation/circle, APSPDCL, Kadapa. As per the terms and conditions of the contract, the appellant had to procure all the raw material requi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 100 (Tri. Bang.)]. He would submit that the impugned order is set aside and the appeal be allowed. 4. The Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand, draws our attention to the findings recorded by the First Appellate Authority. It is his submission that the appellant had collected price from APSPDCL basing on the prices quoted by them in their contract agreement but for the making the payment of duty adopted the price basing on the chartered accountant certificate which is on lower side, compared to the actual value because of non inclusion of value of accessories mounting arrangements / jumpering for the work under taken. It is his submission that the First Appellate Authority was correct in coming to the conclusion, that value of the accessories has to be added to the price of transformers and there is no evidence produced as these items were brought out items. He reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made, the issue that falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the valuation of the transformer adopted by the appellant basing reliance on chartered accountant certificate, cleared to self for e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for the period in question, as submitted by the appellant before the lower authorities and also before us, It is seen from the CAS-4 certificate that the Chartered Accountant has certified the correct assessable value of the transformers sought to be cleared by the appellant. In order to appreciate the correct picture the certificate Chartered Accountant is reproduced: 9. It can be seen from the above reproduced CAS-4 certificate the assessable value of the transformer was ₹ 34,526.78 for 16 KVA and ₹ 44,261.68 for 25 KVA transformer. From the records, it is seen that the appellant had cleared the 16 KVA transformers at the assessable value of ₹ 37,009.64 and 25 KVA at the assessable value of ₹ 48,581.44 discharging both the transformers. The evidences in respect of the same are in the form of invoice which is as reproduced: It can be seen from the above reproduced invoice and the Chartered Accountant Certificate, appellant had discharge the Central Excise duty at the higher assessable value then as certified by the Chartered Accountant. We find that in the appellant s own case, the Tribunal had recorded the following finding which accepts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isdeclaration or on merits. In the result, the appeals have to be allowed with consequential relief if any to the appellant and we do so. 10. In our considered view, the discharged duty liability by the appellant on specimen invoice reproduced above seems to be inconsonance with the law. It is undisputed the transformers were used for erection at the project site deeming it as self consumption. 11. We find the Tribunal in the case of Blue Star Ltd., (supra) has come to a conclusion, which goods cleared on self basis to the site of the customer, valuation done should be in accordance with the provisions of Section 4(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The ratio which is in paragraph 4 is reproduced: 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. From the facts which is not under dispute, we find that the respondent have cleared the goods on self basis to the site of the customer. Since the supply of Air Conditioners/Refrigeration equipments were not sold as such for the reason that the respondent has taken a turnkey project for supply, erection, installation and commissioning. Therefore the sale price of the Air Conditioners/Refrigeratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
