9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 719X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise Tariff Heading No.72061090 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A part of goods are cleared to their other related company, namely, M/s Gangotri Iron and Steel Company Ltd. (GISCO) for manufacture of M.S. Bars. The Department noticed that both the above Companies were part of the same group i.e. Gangotri Group having common interest in the business of manufacture of M.S.Ingots and M.S.Bars. Two of the Directors were common to both the Companies. After going through composition of the Companies, the Department came to the conclusion that GEL and GISCO were related as defined under Section 4 (3)(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the Revenue took a view that the valuation of the goods for clearance from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Ispat Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Raigad reported in 2007 (209) ELT 185 (Tri.-LB) and submitted that as long as a part of the clearance has been made to independent buyers, the same value can be adopted for payment of Excise duty for clearance to the related buyers also ; (iii) The above decision has been followed in several cases. He also pointed out that the dispute pertaining to the same assessee for an earlier period came before this Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its Final Order No.A-220-221/Kol/2012 dated 17.04.2012 had remanded the issue to the adjudicating authority for denovo adjudication keeping in view the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd. (supra). In the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r first in the sequential order of the Valuation Rules but also for the reason that in a case where both the rules are applicable, the application of Rule 4 will lead to a determination of a value which will be more consistent and in accordance with the parent statutory provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944." 8. For the earlier period, in the denovo proceedings, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 28.11.2013 has recorded that GEL has cleared to GISCO the goods at price comparable to the price at which they were cleared to the independent buyers. After such verification, he has dropped the demand for the differential duty made on the basis of costing of transaction. For a different period, the Joint Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
