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

2014 (8) TMI 701

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anufacture of different motor vehicle parts. The amortised cost of these dies was not considered while finalizing purchase orders and determining the terms and conditions of supply. This it is evident from the statement of Shri S.R. Malpani, and Shri S.G. Naniwadekar, Thus, it is clear that the respondent-assessee knew that the cost of the dies had not been included in the value of the motor vehicle parts mentioned in the purchase orders. Yet they never took any action to ascertain in these costs and include the same in the assessable value of motor vehicle parts manufactured and cleared by them to M/s. Bajaj Auto Ltd. As per the provisions of Rule 173F of the Central Excise Central Excise Rules, 1944, it was the responsibility of the as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lusion that the demand is time barred is that the respondent-assessee's records have been audited by the departmental audit team and it would be difficult to accept that the audit party did not check each and every aspect relating to valuation of excisable goods manufactured and cleared by the manufacturers during the period under audit, especially when the appellant had opted for invoice based assessable value in terms of Rule 173(C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Therefore, relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Mutual Industries ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise [2000 (227) ELT 578], the learned lower appellate authority has come to the conclusion that the demand is time-barred. 3. In their appeal memorand .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 1989 (40) ELT 214 (S.C.) and the decision of this Tribunal in Nizam Sugar Factory vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad 1999 (114) ELT 429 , this Tribunal came to the conclusion that specific knowledge on the part of the department has to be established by the assesee about the activities carried out by him and in the absence of such knowledge, extended period of time could be invoked. 3.2 The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) also relies on the decision of the hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Neminath Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. 2010 (256) ELT 369 wherein it has been held that Section 11A(3)(ii) of the Finance Act defining the relevant date does not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the statements of the concerned officials of M/s Bajaj Auto Ltd., who got the vehicle parts manufactured through the respondent-asssessee, it is seen that the respondent were receiving dies/moulds on loan/returnable basis from M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited for manufacture of different motor vehicle parts. The amortised cost of these dies was not considered while finalizing purchase orders and determining the terms and conditions of supply. This it is evident from the statement of Shri S.R. Malpani, Sr. Manager - Materials and Shri S.G. Naniwadekar, Sr. Manager - Materials of M/s. Bajaj Auto Ltd. From the statement of Shri S.M. Nahar, proprietor of the respondent-assessee, it is seen that critical dies were supplied to the respondent by M/s. Baja .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the concept of knowledge on the part of the department is not a relevant factor for computation of time-limit under the provisions of Section 11A(3)(ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. When the law does not provide for taking into account the knowledge of the department, it is not permissible to incorporate such factor as part of the legal provisions. The decision of the hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Neminath Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. makes this position very clear: The termini from which the period of one year' or five years' is to be computed is the relevant date as defined in sub-section (3)(ii) of section 11A of the Act. A plain reading of the said definition shows that the concept of knowledge by the depa .....

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