Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (12) TMI 523 - CESTAT NEW DELHILevy of Central Excise duty - clearance of goods received for job work - applicability of rule 10A read with Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation, (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 in job-work - interest - penalty - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The first thing to be appreciated is that as per Section 3 of Central Excise Act, 1944, the excise duty is leviable on ‘manufacture’ and the goods here are manufactured by the appellant so the liability to pay duty is that of the appellant. However, by virtue of the exemption notification no. 83/94, the liability of central excise duty has been shifted from the job worker to the principal manufacturer, however, subject to the conditions specified therein. In the present case, M/s Aditya being SSI unit is availing exemption from excise duty under notification no. 8/2003- CE, however the exemption under notification no. 83/94-CE is available only on furnishing of an undertaking by M/s Aditya to the proper officer having jurisdiction over the factory of the job worker, (a) that the specified goods received from the job worker will be used in the factory of the supplier in or in relation to the manufacture of specified goods which are exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the small scale exemption notification or in terms of condition number (b) the SSI unit shall undertake to pay central excise duty, if any, payable on the said goods. However, it appears that the principal manufacturer has not furnished any such undertaking either in terms of condition number (a) or (b). Consequently, the liability to pay excise duty shall be on the job worker, i.e., the appellant herein. There are no infirmity on the findings arrived at by the authorities below. Computation of the aggregate value of the clearances in respect of the unit who are availing the SSI exemption - HELD THAT:- The authorities below have rightly observed that in the present case, the valuation of the manufactured goods is to be determined under Rule 10A(iii), whereby Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 will be applicable, which provides: Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used for consumption by him or on his behalf in the production or manufacture of other articles, the value shall be one hundred and ten per cent of the cost of production or manufacture of such goods. Interest - penalty - Extended Period of Limitation - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the appellant was also manufacturing the said goods on its own and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty but deliberately avoided paying duty on the goods manufactured on job work, knowing that the principal manufacturer has failed to comply with the condition of furnishing the undertaking. The evasion of duty came to the knowledge of the department only on audit. Thus, it being a clear case of suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty, the extended period of limitation is invokable and the appellant is liable to pay the interest as well as penalty under the Act. There are no infirmity in the impugned order and therefore the same deserves to be affirmed. The excise duty along with penalty and interest as determined is leviable on the appellant - appeal dismissed.
|