9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew that in respect of these clearances, duty should have been paid on the value determined under Rule 8 of Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 i.e. on 115% of the cost of production. Since the appellant did not furnish the cost data or cost of production, the Department was of the view that the price at which they were paying the duty should be treated as cost of production and duty should be charged on 115% of that price. On this basis, two show cause notices were issued for the demand of duty amounting to Rs. 3,80,055/- for the period April 2000 to March 2003 and Rs. 1,77,409/- for the period April 2003 to March 2004. Show cause notices also proposed recovery of interest on the duty and imposition of penalty. These show cause notices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty demands have been rightly confirmed against the appellant because the appellant were clearing their entire production to a sister unit and as such the valuation in accordance with Rule 8 is perfectly in order. It is further submitted that the plea of the counsel for the appellant is devoid of merit, as there is no evidence on record to indicate that the appellant was clearing acid slurry to independent buyer also. It is further contended that the appellant had been non-cooperative during the adjudication proceedings and despite request did he not furnish any information regarding his goods manufactured and as such, the authorities concerned were well within their right to take the value of the acid slurry which was cleared to their sist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere 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 in our considered view 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. Thus under the circumstances, we are unable to sustain the impugned order which is based upon with arbitrary figures taken as cost of manufacture. Ordinarily we would have remanded the matter back to the adjudicating author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
