Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 986 - CESTAT CHENNAIUnder-declaration of Assessable value of processed fabric – Job Work - Held that:- The under-declaration was on account of wrong declaration given by the merchant manufacturer and not the appellant - This matter relates to the period when the system of filing of price list and getting its approval was still in vogue and the impugned duty payments were made against approved price lists - suppression on the part of the first appellant cannot be held to be proved in this case - the proposal to deny Modvat credit is not sustainable - So demand consequent to such denial is set aside - For the same reasoning the penalties imposed on the first appellant also are set aside. Since duty demand is not contested the same is confirmed. Penalty imposed upon second appellant – Held that:- It was the responsibility of the first appellant to give correct value - even in cases where fabrics were purchased and supplied there was under declaration of value - For giving correct information of value at which goods were purchased no great understanding of law or costing is needed - The argument raised regarding wastages also is not properly explained and not understood - when the matter was pointed out during investigation, the second appellant immediately paid differential duty demonstrating that the second appellant was aware of the mis-declaration – there was no reason to interfere with the penalty imposed on the second appellant. The appeal filed by second appellant is rejected – Decided partly in favour of Assessee.
|