Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 2177 - CESTAT KOLKATAShort payment of duty - undervaluation of goods - allegation is that the appellant was required to make payment of central excise duty on the said goods upon valuation thereof at the prices sold by Philips India to its customers, which having not been done, there was undervaluation of the products in question resulting in short payment of duty - HELD THAT:- The Commissioner’s reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in SIDHOSONS & ANR. ETC. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS ETC. [1986 (10) TMI 38 - SUPREME COURT] in support of the conclusion that valuation of the subject goods had to be on the basis of the prices declared by Philips India to its customers is misconceived and erroneous. It is relevant to state that in the instant case neither in the show cause notices nor in the impugned order there is any allegation or finding that the determination of assessable value of the subject goods cleared by the appellant on which central excise duty was paid did not satisfy the requirements as laid down in UJAGAR PRINTS, ETC. ETC. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [1988 (11) TMI 106 - SUPREME COURT] and PAWAN BISCUITS CO. (PVT.) LTD. VERSUS COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PATNA [2000 (7) TMI 78 - SUPREME COURT] and that the assessable value on which the central excise duty was paid was lower than the assessable value if determined on the basis of total cost of raw materials, labour charges and profit of job workers as laid down in the said decisions. Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|