9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owed - decided in favor of appellant. - Ex/337/2008 - FO/A/76750/2018 - Dated:- 5-10-2018 - SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) AND SHRI S. K. PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri N. K. Choudhary, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri S. Mukhopadhyay, Suptd. (AR) for the Respondent(s) ORDER The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 25/HAL/2008 dated 31.03.2008. 2. The appellant entered into a contract with the railways for supply of Railway Tracks, Nuts, Bolts, etc. The dispute is covering the financial years, 2001-2002 and 2003-2004. During these financial years, the appellant supplied goods to the Railways by availing the SSI exemption benefit under the relevant notifications. In terms of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate relied on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III Vs. Hitkari Fibres Ltd. reported in 2015 (324) E.L.T. 24 (S.C.). He submitted that the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that the additional amount received at subsequent stage could not be added to the transaction value at the time of clearance of the goods. 5. The Ld. D.R., for the Revenue justified the impugned order. His submissions are summarized below : (i) The escalation amount received is relatable to the goods cleared in the respective year, 2001-02 or 2003-04. (ii) He refers to Supreme Court decisions in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune Vs. SKF India Ltd. reported in 2009 (239) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2003-04. The Revenue was of the view that the escalation amounts are required to be added to the turnover of the respective years and the benefit of SSI exemption re-worked out. If, such exercise is carried out, differential duty as upheld by the lower authorities becomes payable. But such view is strongly contested by the appellant with the support of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Hitkari Fibres Ltd. (Supra). We have perused the said decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the Apex Court considered the case of additional amounts received by the respondent therein pertaining to the goods cleared earlier. Hon ble Apex Court observed as follows: 9. In the present case, it is not in doubt that the time when the goods wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
