Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 178 - AT - Central ExciseMethod of valuation of physician samples supplied free of cost - determination of assessable value - confirmation of demand invoking of extended period of limitation - suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- The appellant during the said period, cleared the goods on payment of duty by determining its assessable value applying Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 by adopting Cost Construction Method as was clarified by the CBEC in its Circular dated 01/07/2002. The later Circular dated 25/04/2005 directed that the assessment should be under Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules, 2000. Even though the appellant has submitted the monthly Returns from time to time indicating clearance of the said goods adopting Cost Construction Method, but no objection was raised by the Department during the course of audit or during the visit of the preventive officers to their factory. Under these circumstances, allegation of suppression or mis-declaration of facts by the Revenue cannot be sustained. A similar view has been expressed by this Tribunal in Bora Pharma Pvt. Ltd. case [2017 (11) TMI 1509 - CESTAT MUMBAI] wherein it is observed that in the absence of any evidence to support the allegation of suppression, misrepresentation, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. There are no merit in the impugned order to the extent of confirming demand invoking extended period of limitation - Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed on limitation.
|