9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1933X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of fabrication charges without including the price of materials supplied free by the Indian Railways in terms of Notification No. 120/75-CE dated 30.04.1975. Show Cause Notice dated 26.2.1987 was issued on the ground that the value of the materials supplied by the Indian Railways free of cost was not included in the invoices. It is also the case of the Department that the value of the excisable goods manufactured and cleared from the factory is the value comprising the value of articles used in the manufacturer of such products, overhead expenses etc. The period of dispute is from 01.8.1986 to 22.2.1987. This is in respect of 23 Nos. BOXN wagons. Subsequently another Show Cause Notice dated 27.7.1987 was issued for the period March, 1987 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the year 1992 in the case of Burn Standard Ltd., finally held that the value of free issue of materials shall be includible in the assessable value. Once the dispute was settled, all the job workers including the appellant approached the Railway to pay the appropriate duty for the relevant period. 3. The Learned Consultant further contends that thereafter the Ministry of Railway had taken up this matter with Ministry of Finance and the matter was amicably settled by the Ministry of Railway and Ministry of Finance which has been communicated by the Ministry of Railway to M/s. Wagon India Ltd. by way of a letter bearing D.O. No. 89/F(S) I/ED-CD Exemp/New Delhi dated 29.09.1993 [Page no. 52 of the appeal paper b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of wagon manufactured for them by various wagon manufacturers. Holding as above, the said authority confirmed the demand but accepted the fact that the said amount stood paid by Ministry of Railways to the Department of Revenue and clarified that there is no duty liability on the wagons manufactured for Railway by the Appellant and cleared during the period. The appellant further submits that aforesaid order has not been contested by the department in higher forum. 7. We find that there is no reason for the department to take a contrary view in respect of another unit of the appellant on a similar issue, even after acknowledging that the SCN that gave rise to the present proceeding covered in the negotiation between the Ministry of Ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
