9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 411X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Allegation in the show cause notice is that the appellant had cleared the goods by depressing the assessable value of the goods by not disclosing and including the cost of free facilities provided by the supplier of inputs, in the form of free of cost power and water, free of cost land and free of cost mobile crane for movement of goods. The lower authorities, after visit to the appellant's site/ premises on 22.01.2001 and after checking the Central Excise records, issued show cause notice dated 24.3.2004, demanding the differential duty, on the ground that there has been mis-declaration or suppression of facts of receipts of free goods, without adding money value of additional considerations received from buyers, and for not including r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mit that the Central Excise Registration was taken by the appellant for the site which was provided by M/s. Essar Steels Limited. He also brings to our notice the agreement dated 21.12.1999, wherein the appellant's scope of work and M/s. Essar's scope of work is listed. It is his submission that the said pipes were consumed by M/s. Essar Steels Limited for Sardar Sarovar Drinking Water Project and hence cannot be considered as sale by the appellant to them. 4. Learned departmental representative, on the other hand reiterate the findings of lower authorities. 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides, we find that the issue involved is regarding valuation of the goods i.e. MS Pipes fabricated by the appellants a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T-12 returns to be filed during the relevant period were to be filed along with duty paying documents for the scrutiny of the authorities concerned. If that be so, it cannot be held that appellants suppressed material facts from the Revenue authorities, more so, with intention to evade duty. If the documents have been checked properly by the lower authorities, they would have definitely come to the conclusion that the appellants had no reason to suppress the manufacturing of pipes in the area/space provided by M/s. Essar Steels Limited in order to evade payment of duty. 7. On perusal of work order/contract with M/s. Essar Limited, we find that the said work order/contract specifically indicates the scope of work of the assessee as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
