9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the value by Hyva. Whether the amount of ₹ 10,000/- paid by TML as additional BED on the chassis is required to be added? - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that the amount of ₹ 10,000/- has been availed as cenvat credit by Hyva. However, the adjudicating authority has still included this amount in the value with the findings that Hyva has extended a discount of ₹ 10,000/- on the body built price - since there is no dispute that Hyva has availed additional BED of ₹ 10,000/- as cenvat credit, there is no justification for addition of the same. Time Bar - HELD THAT:- The Adjudicating Authority has not given any specific reason for coming to such conclusion other than a blank observation that the assessee short paid duty by way of suppression of valuation as well as suppression of facts of non-receipt of amount equal to additional BED at specific rate. It was very much within the knowledge of the Department that Hyva has carried out body building for TML and the manufactured vehicles were being paid duty in terms of Valuation Rules - invoking the suppression clause is without basis. Consequently, the demand for differential duty is to be restricted to norm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377; 562/- (iv) An amount of ₹ 10,000/- paid by TML by way of additional BED. 2.3 The differential duty payable was worked out by including the amount as above for the period October, 2003 to 28.02.2007 and demanded from Hyva by issue of show-cause notice dated 11.09.2008. The adjudicating authority finalized the dispute by issue of impugned order, in which he upheld the proposal for demand of differential duty of ₹ 64,64,402/- along with applicable interest under Section 11AB. He also imposed penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs on Hyva as well as TML. This order has been challenged by both the parties involved. 3. Heard Shri Ravi Raghavan and Shri Deepro Sen, Advocates for the Appellants as well as Shri A.Roy, ld.D.R. for the Revenue. 4. The demand for differential duty as well as imposition of penalty have been challenged on the following main grounds : (i) Excise duty has been correctly discharged on the body built chassis. The valuation has been arrived on the basis of Section 4(1)(b) read with Rule 6 of the Valuation Rules. Hyva has followed the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Ujagar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the adjudicating authority. This includes addition of transport cost as well as transit insurance. This view also finds support in the Tribunal s decision in the case of Goel Ispat Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Puducherry reported in 2017 (6) GSTL 210 (Tri.-Chennai). He added that even if the transport charges and transit insurance charges are borne by TML, the same is required to be added by Hyva. (ii) Regarding the amount of ₹ 10,000/- proposed to be added by the adjudicating authority, he submitted that the adjudicating authority has proposed such addition after taking note of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. (supra). He submitted that even though ₹ 10,000/- has been availed as cenvat credit by Hyva, the amount is required to be added to the value because it is in the form of discount extended by Hyva to the body built price. (iii) He also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sri Sundaraganapathy Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem reported in 2017 (357) ELT 989 (Tri.-Chennai). 6. Heard both sides and perused the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and GIL, it was agreed upon that appellants shall arrange for transport and bear all transport charges, loading charges and all other incidental charges in connection with lifting of raw material from principal factory . It is well settled that for the purpose of arriving at assessable value at the job worker s end, cost of transportation of raw material between the principal and the job worker shall form a component for the purpose of arriving at the cost of raw materials. This requirement was reiterated by the CBEC Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX., dated 1-72002 which inter alia clarified that cost of transporting raw materials/inputs to the premises of job work will also be added to determine the cost of raw material/input. The relevant portion of the circular is reproduced below : Sl. No. Points of doubt Clarification 11. How will valuation be done in cases of job work? Please also refer to Board s Circular No. 619/10/2002-CX, dated 19-2-2002 Cost of transporting the raw materials/inputs to the premises of the job-worker w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, but availed as modvat credit by the manufacturer. In this case, the automobile cess paid at the rate of .125% by TML is not availed as cenvat credit by Hyva and hence the same is required to be added to the value by Hyva. 12. Next we turn to question whether the amount of ₹ 10,000/- paid by TML as additional BED on the chassis is required to be added. There is no dispute that the amount of ₹ 10,000/- has been availed as cenvat credit by Hyva. However, the adjudicating authority has still included this amount in the value with the findings that Hyva has extended a discount of ₹ 10,000/- on the body built price. In the circumstances, since there is no dispute that Hyva has availed additional BED of ₹ 10,000/- as cenvat credit, there is no justification for addition of the same in the light of the Apex Court s decision cited above. 13. Hyva has raised the question of time bar and submitted that the demand cannot be enforced by involving the extended period of time limit. The Adjudicating Authority has not given any specific reason for coming to such conclusion other than a blank observation that the assessee short pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
