Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 1082 - AT - Central ExciseEnhancement in valuation of goods - Bar of limitation - Imposition of penalties - Held that:- Appellant has written to the department on 23-4-2007 that they are paying duty as per Rule 6 of the Valuation Rules not as per Rule 10A of the Valuation Rules, 2000 and they are also filing regular returns with the department and it was not objected. Moreover, the appellants have challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay. In these circumstances, we hold that the extended period of limitation is not invokable and extended period is not invokable. Therefore, the demand of duty beyond the period of limitation is set aside and penalties on both the appellants before us are not imposable - demand of duty within the normal period of limitation is upheld. Cess may continue to be levied and collected on the vehicles on the condition they are cleared from the premises of the manufacturers and no cess should be levied again in case the body on the chassis is built by an independent body builder on the cess paid chassis. In the case of S.M. Kannappa Automobiles P. Ltd. v. Commr. of C. Ex., Bangalore reported in [2007 (11) TMI 207 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], the issue came up before this Tribunal and this Tribunal held that as the body builder are not required to pay cess. Cess paid on chassis in this case also on chassis M/s. Tata Motors have paid the cess. Therefore, we hold that the appellants are not required to pay cess as the body on cess paid chassis is built by the appellants. Therefore, demand of cess on automobile is set aside. - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|