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

2025 (3) TMI 192

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... concern of the appellant at higher rate by adding additional items as optional items, including battery etc., which are manufactured by other manufactures. Even as per the statement of the Senior Manager dated 30.10.1990, the purchase order was received from sister concern M/s. Keltron controls and transactions were regulated through Sectional Debit Advices (SDAs). He also stated that the appellant was not aware of the original orders of M/s. Keltron controls and has also not verified the invoices of M/s. Keltron controls regarding sale of UPS system including optional items and the excise duty remittance was not based on the realization of the amount by their sister concern M/s. Keltron controls. The original Adjudicating Authority, only .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent to the appellant by M/s. Keltron Controls, a sister concern of the appellant and the goods were sent to M/s. Keltron Controls by following the procedure laid down in Rule 173 C (11) of Central Excise Rules, 1944, which is reproduced below. "173 C (11) Notwithstanding the provisions of sub-rules (1) to (6), the Collector may, having regard to the nature of goods manufactured or the frequent fluctuations of market price of such goods, allow an assessee or a class of assessees to declare the price of goods transacted by the said assessee or assessees for the particular wholesale consignment on the Gate Pass or accompanying Challan or Advice Note and to determine the duty payable on such goods intended to be removed on the basis of the sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nfirmed the demand and imposed penalty of Rs. 60,000- under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Aggrieved by the said order, appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and on rejection of said appeal vide order dated 27.11.2002, an appeal was filed before this Tribunal in 2005. As per the Final Order dated 26.08.2005, of the Tribunal the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority. On De-novo Adjudication, the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand with the following observation:- "The party did not make these invoices available to the department and the fact of excess collection was suppressed in order to evade duty. I find from the records of the case that there was fraud, collusion, willful misstatement and supp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of power failure and also do not form part of the system. 7. Considering the above facts, Adjudication Authority in its initial order held that since the appellant had filed SDAs along with RT-12 Returns and when it is made available to the concerned officer, there is a failure on the part of department to probe the matter further rather than alleging suppression and confirming demand of duty by invoking the extended period of limitation. The learned counsel also drew our attention to the first Order-in-Original dated 21.09.1999, issued by the Adjudication Authority, where it is held that; "I observe that the party has been filling RT-12s every month along with all copies of Sectional Debit Advices (SDAs). Further these SDAs clearly sho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the third time. The appellant was following the procedure laid down in Rule 173C (11) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and duty payment was based on value shown in the SDAs. It was further sold by the sister concern of the appellant at higher rate by adding additional items as optional items, including battery etc., which are manufactured by other manufactures. Even as per the statement of the Senior Manager dated 30.10.1990, the purchase order was received from sister concern M/s. Keltron controls and transactions were regulated through Sectional Debit Advices (SDAs). He also stated that the appellant was not aware of the original orders of M/s. Keltron controls and has also not verified the invoices of M/s. Keltron controls regarding sa .....

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