9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2002. This being the only allegation available against the Appellants and having regard to the fact that the present Appellants, if applied under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019, would have paid nil liability in view of the relief available to them under Section 124(i)(b) of the Finance Act, 1994 dealing with Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules 2019, vis-a-vis the clarificatory Circular No. 1071/4/2019-CX.8 dated 27.08.2019. Appeal allowed. - Excise Appeal No. 85525 of 2013 Excise Appeal No. 85526/2013 Excise Appeal No. 85543/2013 Excise Appeal No. 85539/2013 Excise Appeal No. 85540/2013 - FINAL ORDER NOS. A/85432-85436/2023 - Dated:- 6-3-2023 - HON BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to the vendors as those were not available for purchase in the open market. Appellant M/s. Siemens Ltd. claims that the same materials were issued freely to the vendors and included in the assessable value of the parts manufactured by them, in compliance to Rule, 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 but the Respondent-Department raised a demand of Excise duty under Rule, 10 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules holding the alleged vendors as job workers. This is the sum and substance of the dispute that reached this Appellant stage. 4. During course of hearing of the appeals learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Rajesh Ostwal submitted that Rule 10A can only be applied when goods were manufactured on job work basis on the mate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Appellant submitted that demand that was confirmed against main Appellant M/s. Techno creations under Rule 10A and M/s. Matrix Machine Technology also under Rule 10A had been settled under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019 and only penalty, under challenge, survived against Appellant M/s. Siemens Ltd. in these two appeals. Likewise demand under Rule 10 that was confirmed against M/s. Weltech Industries was also settled by it under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019 and appeal No. E/85543/2013 pertains to the imposition of penalty on the Chief Financial Officer Sunil Chellani of M/s Morgan Construction Co. India P. Ltd. In submitting judicial decision reported in 2021 (7) TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019, would have paid nil liability in view of the relief available to them under Section 124(i)(b) of the Finance Act, 1994 dealing with Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules 2019, vis-a-vis the clarificatory Circular No. 1071/4/2019-CX.8 dated 27.08.2019 and in view of the consistent decisions of this Tribunal, relied upon by the Appellant as referred above and by both of us passed in the case of V. Narayanan Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai III and Mr. Dinesh Kanoria Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I in Excise Appeal No. 247 of 2012 dated 24.11.2022 and Excise Appeal No. 1612 of 2012 dated 20.12.2022 respectively, appeals of these two Appellants merit consideration and order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
