Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2009 (3) TMI 485

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd falling under Chapter Heading No. 4005.00 and he cleared the same to their job worker, at Coimbatore for manufacture of further products. The further products, which were manufactured on a job work basis were supplied by the job worker to the mother unit, i.e. M/S. Elgitread (India) Ltd. Coimbatore, directly. From the mother unit, the said final products were further cleared for home consumption/export. It was noticed by the Revenue that since them was no sale involved in the clearance of said com pound from the respondent factory at Kottayi to the job worker and the respondent was clearing the same on payment of 16% duty on the value worked out under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 (Determination of price of excisable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ort is being fulfilled though not by direct cash payment, but by adjustment under DEPB Scheme. The credit is accumulated in the pass book on account of exports made, are adjusted against import duty. This situation cannot be treated at par with full exemption and to that extent Notification No. 34/97-Cus. cannot be taken/treated as an exemption notification. Customs duty liability at the time of import is fully discharged, where sufficient credit is available in the DEPB book, it is by an adjustment and where sufficient credit is not available, it is by cash payment. Therefore irrespective of the manner of payment customs duty, duty element has to be added for valuation under Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000. As per the cost ac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urred by an assessee i.e. 115/- of cost of production or manufacture of such goods. It is submitted that the said rule contemplates determination of the assessable value on the basis of the cost c production or manufacture of the goods, which would indicate that the cost of production means it should be actual cost incurred by the Assessee. 4.1 It is also submitted that the entire demand is barred by limitation as show cause notice dated 20-9-2003 was issued for the period 18-10-2000 to 13-10-2001 as the issue was discussed with the officials of the Revenue when they visited the factory premises of the respondent on 5-9-2002. It is his submission that there is no allegation of willful misstatement or suppression of facts with an intent to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... decided is whether Notification No. 34/97-Cus. grants exemption from payment of Customs duty or whether debit through DEPB Pass Book is to be treated as payment of duty. The Lower Authority has found payment of duty through DEPB credit analogous to payments made through a credit card instead of by cash. The Lower Authority has also held that Notification No. 34/97-Cut does not provide for absolute or effective exemption from duty bat provides for payment of duty through DEPB credit. I am not in clined to accept the argument of the Lower Authority on both the counts. I accept the contention of the appellants that if an analogy is to be drawn with credit card payment, then the analogy would hold good if payment through DEPB credit is equated .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inclusion of notional duties which have not been paid by the assessee." 7. We find that the learned Commissioner has correctly followed the law as has been settled by the Larger Bench and has also followed the CBEC Circular for arriving at the conclusion. We do not find anything wrong in the impugned order which simply follows the law, as has been laid down by the Larger Bench and series of the decisions of the Tribunal. 8. Accordingly, we do not find any merits in the appeal filed by the Revenue against the impugned order. The impugned order is correct, legal and proper and needs to be upheld and we do so. The appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. (Operative portion of this Order was pronounced in open Court on conclusion of hearing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates