9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have heard both sides. We find that the issue stands settled in favour of the assesees by Tribunal s Final Order No. 542/10 dated 11.05.10. The relevant extract from the Tribunal s Order is reproduced herein below:- 2. We have heard both sides. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted the Cost Accountant certificate filed by the assessees, certifying the cost of material in accordance with the cost accounting standard-4 (CAS-4) which is the basis to be adopted as instructed by the CBEC. Covering letter of the Cost Accountant is reproduced herein below :- Eveready Industries India Limited, National Carbon Plant at 1075, TH Road, Chennai are engaged in manufacturing dry cell batteries. In the course of manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of production for the purpose of arriving at the assessable value of goods captively consumed is to be computed in accordance with CAS-4. This standard stipulates that the cost of production shall not include marketing costs, corporate overheads and interest. While determining the cost of production at National Carbon Plant, the actual cost incurred is alone to be taken into consideration in respect of raw material received from Mumbai namely electrolytic manganese di-oxide. The corporate overheads and notional deemed profit taken into account for the limited purpose of computing the assessable value for payment of duty at Navi Mumbai Plant is not to be taken into account while working out the cost of production at National Carbon P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of the department as seen from the appeal memorandum that as per CAS-4, the cost of material should be the assessable value. We also note that in the case of Union Carbide India Ltd. Vs Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta [2003 (158) ELT 15 (SC)], the apex court has held that in the case of captive consumption, the cost of production means actual cost of production together with notional profit. Assessee s submission that this method is prescribed in CAS-4 and has been followed by them, is not controverted by Revenue. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal. Cross-objection is only in the nature of comments upon/reply to the Revenue s appeal and is hence dismissed. 3. In addition, we find that the Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
