9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two entities charged higher price on the third parties on which no excise duty was paid. Therefore this is not a case where Revenue neutrality will arise. It is a clear case that Appellant was avoiding Excise Duty payment by charging higher price for the supplies made by their interconnected units. The Adjudicating Authority has gone into totally different direction by going into the percentage of sales effected, which has no legal basis when the facts are very clear that there is a difference between the value charged by Appellant to these two entities and value adopted by these entities for third parties. Therefore on merits, there are no case in favour of the Appellant. The Appeal is dismissed on merits. - Excise Appeal No. 1173 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Authority dropped proceedings. The Order-in-Original was reviewed by the Department and an Appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the Order-in-Original and confirmed the demand. Being aggrieved the impugned Order-in-Appeal Appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Learned Counsel submits that prima facie, the Appellant and the other two entities are not interconnected units. Just because of the fact that the Managing Director of Amara Raja Batteries is also Director of the other two entities and there are two more common Directors, the fact is not established to the effect that they are interconnected units. Therefore, he submits the entire presumption for the proceedings initiated i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d units as per the Section 4(3) Explanation 1 of the Central Excise Act 1944. He further submits that the Appellant has not rebutted the Adjudicating Authority s findings that they are interconnected units. 5. He also submits that from the Annexure-II of the Show Cause Notice, it can be seen that Amara Raja Electronics was charging higher basic price for the independent customers and for the same batteries the Appellant was charging lower price on the two entities. Since the Appellant has clearly admitted that the two entities were not availing the cenvat credit and the batteries were directly been despatched to third parties revenue neutral situation does not arises. This procedure has resulted in the Appellant getting a higher realisat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in all the three units. The Appellant has not even contested the fact that they are not interconnected units before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority has gone into totally different direction by going into the percentage of sales effected, which has no legal basis when the facts are very clear that there is a difference between the value charged by Appellant to these two entities and value adopted by these entities for third parties. Therefore on merits, we do not find any case in favour of the Appellant. The Appeal is dismissed on merits. 7. In respect of the time bar stand taken by the Appellant, we agree with the Learned AR that mere fact that these entities are listed with Registrar of Companies and their Balance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
