9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1014X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TS wires who clear 3x3 Ply HTS wires to their sister concern also and the same was used in manufacture of pressed concrete sleepers by their sister concerns. Department observed that while discharging their duty liability the appellants have not determined the duty payable on the said goods adopting valuation at the rate of 110% of the cost of production of said 3x3 ply HTS given to their sister concern. Accordingly, vide show cause notice no. 973 dated 03 October, 2017 an amount of Rs. 1,84,210/- alleged to be a short paid amount of duty for the period of October 2015 to June, 2017 was proposed to be recovered along with the appropriate interest and the proportionate penalties the said proposal was initially confirmed by Order-in-Original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Final Order No. 50331-50332 of 2019 dated 15.02.2019 with respect to an earlier appeal No. E/52357/2018-DB. The order under challenge, therefore, is prayed to be set aside and the appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. To rebutt the submissions, learned Authorised Representative laid emphasis on the order under challenge. It is mentioned that Commissioner (Appeal) has reasonably discussed the non-compliance of Rule 8 and Rule 9 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of excisable goods) Rules, 2000 due to which the plea of the appellant's have rightly been rejected Order is, accordingly, prayed to be upheld and appeal is prayed to be dismissed. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and pursuing the records and observed we ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no provisional assessment in the present case, the duty determination on the inter-unit transfer is made on annual costing. As such when the Department arrived at cost on annual average basis the duty liability, excess or shortage has also to be determined on such basis. It is not tenable while for arriving at per unit duty liability the whole year data is considered for costing, for total duty liability only months when short payment was noticed were considered. In other words when CAS-4 based annual costing formed basis for arriving transaction value, the overall duty liability/short payment should be arrived at after considering duty already paid during that year on such goods. We find the reasoning given by the Original Authority agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and circumstances, the setting off of the excess payments against the short payment of duty during a subsequent period has already been allowed we find no reason to differ from the adjudications as discussed above, accordingly, we are of the opinion that the adjudicating authority below has failed to consider the CAS-4 certificate issued by the authorised auditors proving the excess payments of duty made by the appellant in terms of Rule 9 read with Rule 8 of the valuation rules. The certain short payments in terms of all these rules have wrongly been denied to be set off against the said excess. The order under challenge is, therefore, set aside. As a result appeal stands allowed.
(Order pronounced on 06.01.2022) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
