Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (11) TMI 564 - CESTAT MUMBAIDuty demand - Valuation of goods - appellants had undervalued the excisable goods cleared to their subsidiary units - As per Revenue, the assessable value of goods cleared to their subsidiary units are required to be determined on the basis of value of comparable goods under Rule 6(b)(i) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 - Held that:- demand is for the period October, 1996 to June, 2000. During this period appellants were clearing the same goods at a higher value to independent buyers than cleared to their subsidiary units. This fact is not in dispute. The appellants were paying duty on the goods cleared to their subsidiary units at the weighted average price which was lower than the value charged to independent buyers. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the dealings were at arms length. From July, 2000, the appellants started paying duty in respect of the goods cleared to the subsidiary units by taking into consideration the cost of production + 15% as provided under the Central Excise Valuation Rules for captively consumed goods. As the comparable price of the goods is available during the period in dispute, as the same were being cleared to independent buyers, therefore we find no infirmity in the impugned order whereby the duty is demanded on the same price in respect of the goods cleared to their subsidiary units - Decided against assessee.
|