9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 557X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of motor vehicles falling under chapter 87 of CETA, 1985. They sell the Chassis and the Vehicles Ex-Factory as well as from RSO (Regional Sales Office) on payment of appropriate central excise duty. They have also an arrangement with various body-builders of the Vehicles to build the Vehicle on their manufactured Chassis. For the said purpose they clear the Chassis on stock-transfer basis after payment of appropriate central excise duty from their factory through their RSO (Regional Sales Office) to the said body builders. The body builders fabricate/build the body of the vehicle on the supplied Chassis and clear/transfer the same to the Applicants' RSO on payment of central excise duty. While paying duty on-the said vehicle, the body build ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and accordingly, the assessable value of the vehicles be determined as per Ujagar Print's [1989 (39) E.L.T. 493 (S.C.)] case and Pawan Biscuits [2000 (120) E.L.T. 24 (S.C.)] case and as per the Circular issued by the C.B.E. & C. bearing No. 619/10/2002-CX., dated 19-2-2002. The method adopted by the body builders in arriving at the assessable value of the body built vehicle manufactured by them on job-work basis, that is, the landed cost of the duty-paid chassis at their factory plus the consideration paid to them for body building activity is, therefore, correct. Secondly, he submits that the demand of duty against the Applicant is incorrect as the manufacturer of vehicles in this case is the body builders and not the Applicant. He refer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The excess CENVAT credit always remains the property of the Applicant. His contention is that the dealing between the Applicant and the body-builders is not a transaction on principal-to-principal basis. Therefore, the method adopted by the body builders by resorting to the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, as mentioned in the Circular dated 19-2-2002, is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. Further, he has submitted that since the Applicant has got the vehicles manufactured on their Chassis in pursuance to the Purchase Order placed on them and the Vehicles are finally cleared from their RSO mentioning the relevant Purchase Order, therefore, the duty is required to be paid on the transactio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to the subsequent period i.e. after 1-7-2000. However, on a simple reading of the said Circular and also these judgments, it can easily be discerned that the fundamental requirement to apply the said principle rests on the dealing between the principal manufacturers i.e. raw material supplier and the job worker. It should be on principal-to-principal basis. In the present case, we find that the Applicant have transferred the chassis to the body builders under a peculiar arrangement, that is, against a trust receipt and the said Chassis is being held by the body builders as trustee. Further, under the terms and conditions of the said arrangement against the heading, 'Taxes', it is mentioned that the excise duty paid by the Applicant wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
