Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 580 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of the goods - Denial of benefit of SSI exemption - clubbing of clearances - Held that:- as far as clubbing of clearances of M/s Royal Engineering by holding the said unit as dummy of M/s Super Industries is concerned, the allegations and findings were mainly based upon the investigation conducted by the Income Tax department and statements recorded therein. However, from the perusal of the Income Tax assessment orders of the respective units subsequent to investigation undertaken by the Income Tax Department, we find that M/s Super Industries and Royal Engineering and other units were separately assessed. We also find that both these units were granted separate central excise registration and were thus separately filing their declarations as well as RT-12 returns. The central excise authorities never questioned the activities of these firms until investigation was undertaken by the Income Tax authorities. We find from records that M/s Royal Engineering was consuming electricity which shows that the units were engaged in manufacturing activity. Also, in the records of Department of Explosives, the vehicles/goods were shown to have been manufactured by M/s Royal Engineering. Taking into account all these facts, we are of the considered view that M/s Royal Engineering cannot be held as dummy of M/s Super Industries and their clearances cannot be clubbed into the clearances of M/s Super Industries. Classification of goods manufactured for use of transport of compressed or liquefied gas - Adjudicating authority has held that the vehicles are classifiable under chapter sub heading 8707 and thus liable for duty. However from the registration details of some of the vehicles produced before us we find that the chassis of such motor vehicle i.e. the prime mover and the number of running gear on which tank is placed, are different. Also from the perusal of the photographs, find that the tanks of transportation of gas were mounted on semi trailers/ running gears and the same were coupled with the prime movers i.e. the Motor Vehicle for transportation of such tanks. We are of the view that since the tanks of such vehicles were not manufactured/ fabricated on chassis of Motor Vehicles but on semi trailer/ running gear, consequentially the goods merits classification under chapter sub heading 87.16 - Following decision of Mitusha Vessels & Engineers Pvt. Ltd Vs. Comm. [1997 (1) TMI 360 - CEGAT, MUMBAI]. While computing the duty demand, the Appellant needs to be extended the benefit of relevant SSI Exemption Notifications as per the conditions contained therein - demand of duty has been made twice or thrice on the same vehicles due to various reasons such as change of ownership of vehicle, clearance of vehicle in name of some person and registration of same vehicle in name of another person etc. as appearing in the record of Department of Explosives. We thus hold that while computing duty demand such repetition/ duplication of demand should be reduced - when duty has not been collected, the price has to be treated as cum-duty price. Therefore the amount realized by the assessee has to be treated as cum-duty price has to be sustained and accordingly the duty demand has to be computed by treating the value as cum duty price - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|