9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eported in CCE, CHENNAI VERSUS M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. [ 2011 (4) TMI 141 - CESTAT, CHENNAI ] represent the correct position in law. The findings of the Larger Bench are The percentage of loading on such cost of production, mandated by provisions of Rule 8 for remittance of excise duty by the Bhadrachalam unit cannot not however be considered as comprised in the cost of the raw material consumed for manufacture of packaging material and thus constituting the cost of production at the Chennai unit. Applying the dictum laid by the Larger Bench in M/S ITC LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI [ 2016 (4) TMI 280 - CESTAT CHENNAI ], it is held that the demand, interest and penalties cannot sustain and requ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ger Bench, reads as under:- (i) Whether, in the case of inter-unit transfer of goods for captive consumption, the entire value (i.e. 115% / 110% of the cost of production) OR the actual cost of production (i.e. 100% of cost) excluding notional loading (i.e. 15% / 10%) of the goods manufactured by the one unit, would be the cost of raw material of the another unit (who used the goods in the manufacture of another article) for the purpose of determining value under Rule 8 of Valuation Rules and CAS-4 issued by ICWAI, for transferring the goods to their other unit for further use. (ii) Whether the decision of Chennai Bench in the case of C.C.E. v. Eveready Industries Ltd. 2011 (274) E.L.T. 564 (OR) the decision of Mumbai Bench in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nclusions recorded in (a) above, we hold that the decision of the Chennai Division Bench of CESTAT in the Final Order dt. 11.5.2010 in Revenue s appeal in Eveready Industries and the subsequent decision of the same Regional Bench in the judgment reported in 2011 (274) ELT 564 represent the correct position in law. The decision of the Mumbai Division Bench in Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Thane-II 2013- TIOL-707 = 2014 (300) ELT 571 (Tri. Mumbai) does not represent correct view regarding application of Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules and the same is overruled. 5. The matter was remitted by the Larger Bench for disposing of the matter in accordance with the conclusions arrived at by the Larger Bench. 6. Applying the dictu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
