9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leared for captive consumption to their own factory. To that extent, the order of the First Appellate Authority as well as the adjudicating authority is correct - however, the lower authorities have not considered the fact that the HR sheets which are manufactured by the appellant are cleared to their own concern under duty paying document. Revenue neutrality - Held that:- The entire demand becomes revenue neutral as the clearances were to their own sister concern who availed the CENVAT Credit - Tribunal in the case of Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. [2013 (8) TMI 1022 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] have held that There cannot be any intention to evade duty on such clearance made to their own sister concern, as the said sister concerns admittedly are di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority and after following due process of law, an amount as differntial duty was confirmed along with interest and a penalty was also imposed. 3. Learned Counsel after taking Bench through the case records submits that they had cleared the HR stripes manufactured from their factory on sale basis to their own unit at Patancheru for further use in the manufacture of final products. The transaction consists sale within the meaning Section 2(h) of the Central Excise Act 1944, as possession and control of the goods is transferred to the purchasing unit of the same manufacturing, even though the seller and buyer are sister concerns. It is also his submission that the allegation in the show cause notice is that the clearance of the goods from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the normal period of limitation. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. 6. The issue is regarding the demand of differential duty from the appellant for the period July 2000 to June 2001 on the goods cleared by them to their own unit situated at Patancheru under proper invoices. Appellant had resorted to discharge the central excise duty based upon the value declared by him as a transaction value while the revenue authorities seek to demand the duty based upon the valuation as per Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. 7. Undisputedly, the demand which has been raised on the appellant is for under valuation on the goods cleared to their own unit at Patancheru. 8. There is no doubt as to the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid the duty liability on being pointed out. We find ourselves in agreement with the submissions of Ld.C.A. that question of demanding interest or penalty could not have arisen in this case, as the appellant herein has claimed revenue neutrality. We find that the contention raised by the appellant as to revenue neutrality has got strong force in as much as there is no dispute that clearance of resins was to their own sister unit. There cannot be, to our mind, any intention to evade duty on such clearances made to their own sister concern, as the said sister concerns admittedly are discharging the duty liability on the final products manufactured by them; which would mean that the sister concerns could have availed the Cenvat credit of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal has further found that as such whatever duty the assessee was paying was available as credit to its own unit (sister concern) and hence the entire exercise was revenue neutral. 4. The aforesaid findings of facts are not disputed. The grievance was that the aspect of undervaluation has not been considered by the Tribunal at all. Grievance would have merited acceptance if the ultimate exercise would have benefited the Revenue by collection of duty in the coffers of the exchequer. In the facts of the present case, admittedly no such benefit accrues to the exchequer. In the circumstances, if the Tribunal has chosen not to determine an academic issue, it is not possible to state that any legal infirmity exists in the impugned order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In as much as the appellants have admitted that there was undervaluation in respect of the fabrics, demand should be confirmed against them. 4. After carefully considering the submissions made by both sides, we find that if the appellants would have paid higher duty by adopting higher assessable value at the time of clearance of the fabrics, their unit situated at Nadiar would have taken credit of the same. It is not a case where the goods are being sold by one assessee to another. It is basically taking out money from one pocket and putting the same in other pocket of same trouser. The other unit at Nadiar was appellant s own unit and it was only for the procedural and technical purposes that the duty was required to be paid at the time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
