9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Limited and Parag Fabrics. 2.The department was of the view that these three firms Parag Industries Limited, Parag Prints Private Limited and Parag Fabrics are related by reason of the fact of common office and directors, and the fact that brand name 'Parag' which belong to Parag Prints Private Limited is also being used by the job worker. Notice was issued proposing to adopt as the assessable value of the fabrics processed by Parag Industries Limited, price at which these fabrics are sold by Parag Prints Private Limited and Parag Fabrics. In the order impugned in these appeals the Commissioner has confirmed the proposal in the notice and demanded duty, which found to be short paid, from Parag Industries Limited. He imposed penalty on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (a), of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Act. Paragraph 3 of the proviso under this clause stipulates that where an assessee sells the goods to or through a related person it is the sale price of that person which is deemed to be the price. The question of relationship therefore would arise in a case where the value to be determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 4. When this sub-section does not apply for the reason that the goods are not sold, we have to turn to the Valuation Rules, more specifically rule 6 in cases where the goods are not sold by the manufacturer and the price of comparable goods is not known. The price of such goods is to be determined on the cost of raw material, manufacture, including the profits a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ive of whether there is any relationship or not for the reason that we have indicated. We therefore respectfully follow these decisions and apply this ratio to the facts before us, adding the caveat that the situation would be different in cases where as a result of the relationship the cost of manufacture declared by the manufacturer is not the true cost. 6.The fact that the appellant cleared only about 35% or so of the production to the allegedly related persons is also of great significance. The appellant had urged before the Commissioner that the cost of processing of the fabrics which it cleared to other persons was the same as the cost which it incurred on the processing of the fabrics supplied by Parag Fabrics and Parag Prints. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
