Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 1132 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - inclusion of drawing, designing and engineering charges collected by the Appellant in the assessable value for the purpose of calculating the Central Excise duty or not - time limitation. Appellant paid service tax on designing and engineering services and not included the same in the assessable value for the purpose of payment of central excise duty. HELD THAT:- When a tax under any statute is assessed and paid as per the requirement of the statute, it must be complied with. Even though the assessee might have paid the tax wrongly under a different tax statute, it does not satisfy the compliance of the statute under which the assessee is rightly required to pay their tax liability. This view has been held by this tribunal in the case of PHOENIX YULE LIMITED VERSUS COMMR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOL-III [2018 (7) TMI 683 - CESTAT KOLKATA] where it was held thatThe charges paid by the subscribers for procuring a SIM Card are generally processing charges for activating the cellular phone and consequently the same would necessarily be included in the value of the SIM Card. Thus, assessee appellant should have included the charges of engineering drawing and design in the assessable value of conveyor belts as per the provisions of Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 - also, the payment of service tax on the charges recovered from the buyer of engineering drawing & design is not a proper compliance of provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 and thus short payment of Central Excise duty stands recoverable. The excise duty can be demanded on the same amount charged for drawing and designing, even if service tax has already been discharged on the same value, if they are related to the goods manufactured. As the department has not examined each contract separately to ascertain the liability, we deem it proper to remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority to examine the issue afresh and pass an appropriate order. Time limitation - HELD THAT:- As there is no suppression of fact with an intention to evade payment of tax has been established in this case, the extended period cannot be invoked in this case. Accordingly, the demand confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation set aside. Since the exact quantum of duty, if any, liable to be confirmed within the normal period of limitation is not available in the records, the matter needs to be remanded back to the adjudicating authority on this count also to determine the duty liability, if any, on the basis of the above said observations. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|