Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 880 - AT - Central ExciseMethod of valuation of goods - Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 or not - related person - mutuality of interest exists or not - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Though, the Department holds that the two units are related, they fail to show the mutuality of interest. Also, the fact that the appellants do not sell 100% of their production, to the related person, so as to invite assessment at the rate of 115% of the cost of production, is completely ignored. That the appellants have correctly relied the case of SOUTH ASIA TYRES PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX., AURANGABAD [2002 (11) TMI 167 - CEGAT, MUMBAI] where the Tribunal finds that In the face of the language of the relevant rules, viz. 9 and 10, we accept the plea of the appellants that the department's method of valuation of goods sold by them to M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. on the basis of M/s. Goodyear India Ltd.'s sale price to its customers is not correct and that the price at which the appellants have sold the goods to M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. is the correct basis for determination of assessable value of goods manufactured and cleared by the appellants to M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Looking into the fact that the appellants have deposited the duty demanded well five years before the issuance of show-cause notice there too on a debatable issue, the extended period could not have been invoked and show-cause notice should not have been issued for longer period. The appellants have a strong case in their favour, both on merits and on limitation. Accordingly, appeal allowed partly by setting aside the penalty and interest.
|