Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2018 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 21 - HC - Central ExciseMaintainability of appeal - Section 35G of CEA - Scope of SCN - Valuation - IC Engines and parts thereof which are captively consumed - Rule 6(b)(ii) of the erstwhile Central Excise (Valuation) Rules 1975 applied - Revenue objected on the ground Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Valuation Rules has not been properly applied, as various expenses which need to be included are not included to arrive at the cost of production of I.C. Engines and parts thereof - Revenue Neutrality. Held that:- The question of valuation though raised in the Appeal before it, was not examined by the Tribunal. This as the Appeal was allowed on account of Revenue neutrality making the question of appropriate valuation academic in the present facts - the impugned order does relate to the valuation of goods for the purposes of assessment. Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. [2017 (4) TMI 881 - SUPREME COURT] has held that where an issue relating to valuation for purpose of assessment arises and the order is passed in breach of natural justice, then the Apex Court will admit the Appeal. The submission that if this Appeal is admitted today then at the final hearing, if this Court holds that the issue of valuation has to be gone into it, the only order would be to remand the appeal to the Tribunal to decide the issue of valuation. This submission proceeds on the basis that the Appellate Authority while disposing of an Appeal which is in breach of principle of natural justice is only required to set aside the order and restore it to the Lower Authority for passing a fresh order. This submission is not based on provision which restricts the power of an Appellate Authority. Needless to state when there is any breach of natural justice is alleged, the Appellate Authority would have to examine the underlying dispute and find out whether on facts any prejudice is caused to the party or is the remand going to be an empty formality in the facts of this case. Maintainability of appeal - Held that:- When Section 35G of the Act very clearly excludes our jurisdiction in respect of the orders of the Tribunal relating to the rates of duty and the value of goods for the purposes of assessment, among other things, we cannot entertain an Appeal on the above issue on ground of perceived hardship. Appeal not maintainable in view of Section 35G of the Act - appeal dismissed as not maintainable.
|