9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 907X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said ground to demonstrate as to how the report is incorrect. The short payment alleged in the demand notice has been mostly due to incorrect application of depot sale invoice in terms of its time of sale from depots to the time of clearance from the factory; also applying the sales invoice of a particular depot to the clearance meant for another depot from the factory, for example, when the clearances is made to Chandigarh depot from the factory instead of applying the sale price of the said depot, the sale price prevailing at Delhi depot has been applied. There are no reason to interfere with the order of the adjudicating authority as the same is based on correct verification of the data submitted during the course of adjudication; als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value arrived on the basis of sale of goods from the depots applied to the factory gate at the time of its transfer/clearance to depots in terms of Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 had not been computed correctly resulting into short payment of duty. Consequently, a show-cause notice was issued to them on 25.01.2010 demanding differential duty of Rs.65,82,991/- being the amount of duty short paid on the clearances of goods from the factory to depots which were ultimately sold from the depots. On adjudication, the learned Commissioner dropped the proceedings initiated against the respondent. Hence, the Revenue is in appeal. 2. Learned AR for the Revenue reiterated the grounds of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble and consequently the learned Commissioner has dropped the proceedings accepting the said Report. He further submits that as directed by this Tribunal to demonstrate on sample basis, the correctness of methodology adopted by the adjudicating authority they have furnished a detailed compilation duly tabulated it depot sales invoice-wise to the value adopted at the factory gate along with the relevant documents. Further he submits that the show-cause notice mainly relied on certain invoices which are not relevant to a particular depot to which the goods were cleared from the factory and also invoices of earlier dates instead of taking the depot sale price of nearest time to the time of clearance of the goods from the factory to the depots ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds are not sold at or about the same time, at the time nearest to the time of removal of goods under assessment. 5. During the course of hearing, the Revenue was directed to place the report of the Range Superintendent indicating verification of the data furnished by the respondent during the course of adjudication. Consequently, the Department has placed the copy of the note sheet of the adjudication file wherein it is categorically recorded that after furnishing the data by the assessee-appellant, the same has been duly verified and found to be in accordance with Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. To ascertain the said fact, the respondent was directed to furnish sample copies o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
