Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 1135 - AT - Central ExciseInvokation of extended period of limitation - Demand and imposition of penalty - differential duty - inclusion of element of 'bonus and gratuity' in the cost of the product -appellant supplying their goods to sister concern unit on the valuation arrived at through Cost Construction Method on the basis of Cost Accountant’s Certificate - Held that:- it is found that the appellant have been filing their price declaration in form annexure II(b) alongwith necessary certificate of costing for the product declared in their declaration. They have categorically stated method of costing. They also declared that at the end of the year, after finalization of the cost, differential duty shall be paid. With these facts whether certain element, which were escaped to be included in the cost or otherwise could have been detected by the department on the basis of declaration and costing certificate. Moreover, the allegation of non inclusion of certain element in the cost is not based on the any evidence or documents. It is also observed in the show cause notice that there is no specific allegation of suppression of facts or mis-declaration for invoking extended period under proviso to Section 11A. Therefore demand for extended period is not sustainable. Since duty demand itself is not sustainable, penalty is also not imposable. In absence of suppression of facts on the part of the appellant impugned order is set aside. Duty for the normal period, paid by the appellant alognwith interest is maintained. - Decided in favour of appellant
|