9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .B. Sharma, DR For the Respondent : Shri B L Narsimhan, Advocate JUDGEMENT Per Archana Wadhwa (for the Bench): Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner, Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. After hearing both sides, duly represented by Shri B B Sharma, learned DR appearing for the Revenue and Shri B L Narsimhan, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent, we find that re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MRP value affixed on the spare parts after claiming the permissible abatement. As per the appellant, the value arrived in terms of section 4A of the Act by Faridabad unit is more than the value at which duty has been paid by NOIDA unit and accordingly Faridabad unit, after exhausting credit availed by them, is also discharging duty liability through PLA. Revenue by entertaining a view that appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ving been raised on 8.7.11 for the period June, 2006 to December, 2010. He further took note of various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and held that whatever duty was payable by the respondents, was available as credit to their Faridabad unit, who were again paying duty on the basis of MRP. As such, he held that there is no short fall of duty. However, he further held that as the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, which were fixing the goods with MRP sticker and were again paying the duty on the MRP of the goods. As such, we agree with the finding of the Commissioner, the entire situation is Revenue neutral and no duty can be said to have been evaded by the respondents. For the above proposition, we may refer to Tribunal's decision in 1 CCE, Vadodara vs. Narmada Chematur Pharmaceuticals Ltd. [2005 (179) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
