Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (7) TMI 880

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... MI 167 - CEGAT, MUMBAI] where the Tribunal finds that In the face of the language of the relevant rules, viz. 9 and 10, we accept the plea of the appellants that the department's method of valuation of goods sold by them to M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. on the basis of M/s. Goodyear India Ltd.'s sale price to its customers is not correct and that the price at which the appellants have sold the goods to M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. is the correct basis for determination of assessable value of goods manufactured and cleared by the appellants to M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Looking into the fact that the appellants have deposited the duty demanded well five years before the issuance of show-cause .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erred by the appellant, Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the confirmation of duty on the ground that the same has already been deposited, set aside the penalty and interest. On an appeal made by the Department against such setting aside of penalty and interest, CESTAT vide Final Order No.238/2010-EX (DB) dated 30.04.2010 remanded the matter back to the First Appellate Authority, for a fresh consideration of demand of interest and penalty, while upholding the confirmation of the demand. The said authority has confirmed the duty and interest as proposed vide OIA dated 25.02.2011, which is impugned in this appeal. 2. Shri Sudeep Singh Bhangoo, learned Counsel for the appellants submits that learned Commissioner has erred in holding th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cleared at the rate of 115% of cost of production, invoking Rule 8,even though, it was not the case that the entire production was sold to the related person or inter-connected undertaking; therefore, there is no requirement to such an assessment and there was no evasion of duty by the appellants; even then as a good-will gesture, the appellants have debited the entire duty of Rs.5,69,009/- from the CENVAT credit account; there was no need for issuance of show-cause notice and imposition of penalty. 4. Coming to the demand of interest, learned Counsel submits that in terms of sub-Section (ii)B of Section 11A introduced with effect from 11.05.2001, interest on duty short paid etc. was chargeable after the expiry of three months from the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... invite assessment at the rate of 115% of the cost of production, is completely ignored. We find that the appellants have correctly relied the case of South Asia Tyres Ltd. (supra). The Tribunal finds that: 2. We have heard Shri Sridharan, ld. Counsel for the appellants and Shri S.V. Parelkar, D.R. for the department. We find that in appeal filed by M/s. South Asia Tyres Ltd. for the prior period, the Tribunal vide Order No. C.II/2803- 06/2002-WZB, dated 12-9-2002, has held that the appellants and M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. are not related persons as they do not have interest in the business of each other. In the period covered by the present case, the applicable section is the new Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, inserted with effect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Central Excise Act. 4. We see great force in the above submissions which stems from the language of the Rules themselves. Rules 9 10 are reproduced below for ease of reference: When the assessee so arranges that the Rule 9. excisable goods are not sold by an assessee except to or through a person who is related in the manner specified in either of sub-clause (ii), (iii) or (iv) of clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the Act, the value of the goods shall be the normal transaction value at which these are sold by the related person at the time of removal, to buyers (not being related person); or where such goods are not sold to such buyers, to buyers (being related person), who sells such goods in retail : Prov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates