TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aspect of this adjudication. Neither in the show cause notices nor in the order-in-original nor in the order-in-appeal there is even suggestion that the officers tried to work out the cost of manufacture. The only reason to justify this valuation as given in the impugned order is that the appellant was non-cooperative and despite request he did not furnish any information regarding his manufacturing cost. That by itself does not vest the adjudicating authority or the Appellate Authority with powers to arbitrarily fix the cost of manufacture without making any efforts to scrutinize the relevant record of the assessee. - Matter remanded back for reconsideration. - E/759-760/2006 - A/1156-1157/2012-EX(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 3-9-2012 - Ajit Bha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... March 2003 penalty of equal was also imposed. These orders of the Assistant Commissioner were upheld by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) by a common order in appeal dated 19-1-2006 against which these two appeals have been filed by the appellant. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri R. Santhanam, Advocate, the ld. Counsel for the appellant pleaded that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law firstly for the reason that Rule 8 of Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 has been wrongly invoked as the appellant was clearing acid slurry manufactured by him to independent buyers also. It is further submitted that otherwise also it is not a case of captive consumption. It goes to two different units. There is no basis for working o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion unit of the appellant. On perusal of the order-in-original as well as impugned order we find that but for the passing reference pertaining to audit, there is no reference in those orders as to whether or not the audit party tried to work out the manufacturing cost of acid slurry produced in the factory of the appellant during the period in dispute. 6. Rule 8 of Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 deals with the cases where the manufacturer has cleared the excisable goods for his captive consumption only. Said rule is reproduced thus : Rule 8. Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used for consumption by him or on his behalf in the production or manufacture of other articles, the value shall be one hundre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tices dated 15-10-2004, the appellant vide letter dated 23-11-2004 informed the Revenue authority that other unit of the appellant company during the relevant period had been purchasing acid slurry from other independent manufacturers to meet its requirement and the acid slurry transferred by the appellant to his other unit in Delhi was cleared at the valuation higher than the purchase price from the market. Neither the adjudicating authority nor the appellate authority has cared to look into this aspect of the matter. This circumstance also go against the Revenue. 7. In view of the discussion above, we ourselves are unable to sustain the impugned orders. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are accepted. - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
