TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wrong in applying Rule 8 and 9 of Valuation Rules to confirm the duty demand upon the appellant – in favor of assessee - E/611/2005 - A/519/2012-EX(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 2-5-2012 - Justice Ajit Bharihoke, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Bhupinder Singh, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Sunil Kumar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice Ajit Bharihoke, President]. This appeal is directed against order of Commissioner (Appeals), dated 29-11-2004 whereby he dismissed the appeal of the appellant against the order-in-original and confirmed the duty demand to the extent of Rs. 21,75,395/- with interest. 2. Facts in brief are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of woollen yarn, acrylic yarn, grey ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yers, the appellant has rightly value those goods for the purpose of excise duty as per transaction value, which was common to all the buyers. Learned Counsel further submits that Rule 8 and 9 of Valuation Rules are not applicable as those rules are applicable in the cases where the goods cleared are used captively or are cleared to related parties only. Thus, it is contended that the appellant has correctly paid the excise duty in terms of Rule 4, as such, the impugned order arising the excise duty in terms of Rule 8 and 9 of Valuation Rules is not sustainable. 4. Shri Sunil Kumar, AR on the contrary, submits that this is a case in which the supplies were made only to the related parties or for capitive use by the appellant, as such, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant has correctly paid excise duty in terms of Rule 4 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules or Rule 8 and 9 of the aforesaid rules are applicable for the purpose of valuation, as claimed by the respondent. To resolve this controversy, it would be helpful to have a look at the relevant rules which are reproduced thus :- Rule 4. The value of the excisable goods shall be based on the value of such goods sold by the assessee for delivery at any other time nearest to the time of the removal of goods under assessment, subject, if necessary, to such adjustment on account of the difference in the dates of delivery of such goods and of the excisable goods under assessment, as may appear reasonable. Rule 8. Where the excisable goods are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orts to clearance of goods to unrelated buyers through a related party. Since in the instant case, the assessee had cleared goods on the same price to the related as well as unrelated parties, in our considered view, Rule 4 is applicable. Thus, we conclude that the assessee g had rightly paid excise duty based upon Rule 4 of Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 and the Adjudicating Authority as also the Appellate Authority have gone wrong in applying Rule 8 and 9 of Valuation Rules to confirm the duty demand upon the appellant. We have gone through the authorities relied upon by the respondent. In our considered view the judgments are not applicable to the facts of this case. 7. In view of the above, we find it difficult to sustain the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
