9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of such clearances is higher than the value on which duty liability has been discharged by the appellant on the captively consumed goods. Rule 8 come into play when captively consumed goods are used for production or manufacture of other articles - In the case in hand, the factual matrix is that appellant has not consumed the goods for production or manufacture of other articles but has consumed the same for Civil construction from the expansion of the projects, hence the claim of applicability of the Rule 8 is ruled out. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- Since, there was litigation on the issue at various forums, the plea of Learned Counsel that there was no malafide in valuing the captively consumed goods based upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... premises. Appellants are manufacturers of various Iron and Steel products and clear from their factory directly or through their depot. During the period in question, appellant consumed various Iron and Steel products like TMT Rebars, Angles, Channels, Blooms and Billets etc., in relation to the expansion project for use within their factory for sheds and fabrication of structurals. Appellant undisputedly, discharged the Central Excise duty on these captively consumed Iron and Steel products, assessed the products as provided under Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. The Officers of the Department held a view that all such clearances affected within the factory premises will not be covered by the provisions of Rule 8 of the Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rect. He would submit that Board Circular No. 354/81/2000-TRU dated 30.06.2000 specifically clarifies that the valuation of captively consumed goods has to be on the basis of the valuation rules also refers to the Notification No. 14/2013-C.E. (N.T.) dated 22.11.2013 for submitting that by this notification, provisions of rule 8 has been amended which now mandates for valuation of the goods consumed should be based upon cost of production plus profit, even if the goods are wholly or partly or sold. He would submit that judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Surya Roshni Ltd., [2017 (357) ELT 978 (Tri-Del.)] and Ultratech Cement Ltd., [2017 (11) TMI 1385-CESTAT-New Delhi] had an occasion to consider the said notification; on a similar s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se in hand. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides, we find that the issue on facts is not much disputed inasmuch that appellant is discharging the appropriate duty liability on the finished goods cleared out of factory to independent buyers and files regularly monthly returns with the authorities; that there is captive consumption of the goods for expansion of the factory and discharged the duty liability on such captively consumed goods by assessing the same on cost of production basis plus 10% or 15% profit on the goods as mandated and duly was reflected in the monthly returns. It is also undisputed that the self same products were cleared to independent buyers at transaction value as per Section 4 of Centra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely consumed goods are used for production or manufacture of other articles. In the case in hand, the factual matrix is that appellant has not consumed the goods for production or manufacture of other articles but has consumed the same for Civil construction from the expansion of the projects, hence the claim of applicability of the Rule 8 is ruled out. Argument of Learned Counsel as to reliance on the amended to Rule 8 as made by notification No. 14/2013-C.E. (N.T.) dated 22.11.2013, to press his point hence, will not carry his case further. In order to consider the same, the amended rule 8 is reproduced: 8. Where whole or part of the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used for consumption by him or on his behalf i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly cleared outside the factory premises, had to be decided by the Larger Bench in the case of Ispat Industries Limited. Since, there was litigation on the issue at various forums, we find that the plea of Learned Counsel that there was no malafide in valuing the captively consumed goods based upon the cost of production formulae consumed goods needs to be accepted. In view of this, we hold that the demands raised in these appeals by invoking the extended period of time are unsustainable and liable to be set aside and we do so. Consequently, the interest liability and the penalties are also set aside. 12. The demands raised and confirmed within the limitation period are upheld along with interest and penalties imposed for such an amount i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
