9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed. - APPEAL NOS: E/1458 to 1462/2009 - A/85535-85539/2019 - Dated:- 20-3-2019 - Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) And Dr Suvendu Kumar Pati, Member (Judicial) Shri Prakash Shah and Shri Durgesh Nadkarni, Advocates for appellants Shri Anil Choudhary, Deputy Commissioner (AR) for respondent ORDER Per: C J Mathew Assailed before us is order-in-original no. 21/EX/2009 dated 16th September 2009 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolhapur that ordered recovery of differential duty of ₹ 19,72,330 and ₹ 85,21,145, along with appropriate interest under section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944, on clearance of excisable goods effected by M/s United Industries and M/s Shreem Engineering Industries a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 and which has been followed in Philips Electronic India Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh [2015 (328) ELT 600 (Tri. Del.)] 4. Learned Counsel also contends that, at the time of registration of the three factories, full details of ownership and share pattern had been intimated to the central excise authorities of the common jurisdiction. He also contends that the issue itself had not been free of uncertainty as reliance was placed on a judicially determined interpretation for fastening the duty liability. 5. From the show cause notice, and the adjudication order, it would appear that the appellants had been discharging duty liability on their cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son. The Tribunal in re Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd, in a dispute straddling the pre-amendment and post-amendment eras of section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 in the facts and circumstances of 4. ... sales to independent buyers, those prices should constitute the assessable value of all the goods. During the hearing of the case it was emphasised that the Revenue authorities have not disputed the sale prices to two distributors as in any way being non-commercial prices. Therefore, these prices would form the assessable value for the goods sold to the related party also. and though contested by Revenue that 8. in the present case about 97% of the goods were being sold only through its subsidiary. Therefore, the reje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emed to be price at which the goods are ordinarily sold by the related person in course of wholesale trade at the time and place of removal to independent buyers. When, the assessee, in addition to sale of the goods produced by him to related person on regular basis, also sells the same goods on regular basis to independent buyers, the third proviso to Section 4(1)(a) would not apply and in that case the normal price at which the assessee was selling the goods to independent buyers which would be the assessable value even in respect of the sales to related persons. The reason for this is that in terms of provisions of Section 4(1)(a), as the same stood during the period of dispute, when the goods manufactured by an assessee attracted duty a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay High Court in the case of Cosmos India Rubber Works Private Limited v. Union of India (supra). Applying the ratio of these judgments of the Tribunal of Bombay High Court to the present case, even if in this case, it is assumed that PALI and Philips India Limited were related persons within the meaning of this term as defined in the Section 4(4)(c), the assessable value of the goods sold by PALI to Philips India Limited would be the price at which the similar goods were being sold by PALI to Bajaj Electricals Limited and in this regard, the department has not refuted the plea of PALI that the sale price of the goods manufactured by them to PIL was more or less same as the sale price of similar goods to Bajaj Electricals Limited. In vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
