9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the valuation may be decided under Rule 11 by adopting Challaning Rate - Keeping such decision of the Tribunal in view, it appears that the valuations during the disputed period in this case, are also to be done on the basis of Challaning Rate. It is prayed that payment in excess may be allowed to be adjusted towards short payment in many other cases. We also find that such request is also fair and equitable - matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for the purpose of re-calculation of the demand after allowing adjustment towards the excise duty excess paid. If any differential duty is to be paid by BSNL, the same may be recovered from BSNL - penalty set aside. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal Nos. Ex./354 & 376/09 & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Book. Notional profit of 15%/10% was also added. The Challaning Rate was arrived at by taking into account the valuation of materials procured during the previous financial year. After scrutiny of the accounts of the appellant, the Department was of the view that valuation was required to be adopted with reference to Challaning Rate but on the basis of value of materials within the current year when the goods were cleared. In the meantime, similar dispute in respect of certain other factories of BSNL for similar clearance made to BSNL Telecom Circles was decided by CESTAT in the case of BSNL Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Haldia reported in 2007 (215) ELT 127 (Tri.-Kolkata). In this decision, the Tribunal took the view that valuation in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iated the amount already paid. (ii) The ld.Consultant also submitted that while adopting the Challaning Rate for the current year, it is evident that BSNL has paid excess duty in respect of several clearances while they have short paid duty in several other clearances. He submitted that the excess duty paid should be allowed to be adjusted in the total short paid duty. BSNL has arrived at the differential duty payable after adjusting the excess duty paid and has already paid the differential duty as per this calculation. The demand to that extent is admitted by BSNL. 6. The ld.D.R. for the Revenue submitted that the Revenue has accepted the CESTAT s decision holding that the valuation may be done on the basis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l in the year in question and not on the basis of the earlier year s raw materials. We find that this view is fair. The appellant has no serious objection to adopting this view, but they have only requested that in many cases, when value is re-determined the on basis of excess duty stands paid. It is prayed that payment in excess may be allowed to be adjusted towards short payment in many other cases. We also find that such request is also fair and equitable. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that if such adjustments are made, the differential duty will ultimately work out to the amount already admitted by BSNL and paid. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
