Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 323 - AT - Central ExciseTime limitation - Valuation - inclusion of additional discount - Revenue challenged the extra discount given to these exporters on the ground that the appellants are receiving the extra consideration in the shape of intermediate advance license and therefore, the same amount to extra consideration and needs to be included in the value of the goods cleared for the purpose of payment of duty - Held that:- Revenue wrote many letters but the appellant did not give the necessary information for issue of notice. Thus, in practical terms there was suppression of information specifically asked by Revenue - The appellant’s action in not paying duty may be bona fide but in failing to furnish information it cannot be said to be bona fide. It was with obvious attempt to scuttle or delay the issue of notice - invocation of extended period justified. Valuation - includibility of the value of the intermediate advance license of extra consideration - Held that: - It is seen from the price list of the appellant that they were offering the extra discounts subject to the buyer complying all the legal requirements for obtaining the advance license - From the remarks on the price list of the appellant, it is apparent that intermediate advance license was obtained at the desire of the appellant and thus, the argument of the appellant that the said intermediate license does not amount to consideration has no merit. Reliance placed in the decision of Apex Court in the case of IFGL Refractories Ltd. [2005 (8) TMI 112 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where it was held that As the additional consideration was to flow to them as discounts, they have sold at the rates mentioned in the letter of 2nd March 1993. The "additional consideration" is the difference in prices between these two. The Commissioner had thus correctly worked out this difference. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|