TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 910X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruled out - we are of the prima facie view that, on applicability of Rule 6 to the transactions in question, the appellant has no case, but their challenge to the manner of value addition done by the adjudicating authority needs careful consideration. As to the plea of limitation, the appellant does not seem to have made out a convincing case - Decided against assessee. - E/509/2011 - STAY ORDER NO.806/12 - Dated:- 5-12-2012 - P G Chacko And Mathew John, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri N Viswanathan, Shri S Janakiraman, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri M Rammohan Rao, Dy. Commr. (AR) Per: P G Chacko: The application filed by the appellant seeks waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery in respect of Rs 1,06,48,228/- demanded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ween the appellant and their buyers inasmuch as, such transactions did not involve any provision for supply of drawings and designs to the appellant free of charge or otherwise, etc. The learned counsel has referred to the relevant invoices and purchase orders and has submitted that these documents did not provide any basis for the impugned demand.' The learned counsel has relied on Commissioner Vs TATA Motors - 2009 (237) ELT 147 (Tri.Kolkata). The learned counsel has also vehemently contested the demand of duty on the ground of limitation. It is submitted that the SCN was issued in March 2011 after a gap of 3 years since conclusion of investigations and that all the relevant materials had been gathered by the department as early as in 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of suppression levelled against the appellant cannot be faulted. In this connection, the learned DC (AR) has relied on Commissioner Vs Kalvert Foods India Pvt. Ltd . - 2011 (270) ELT 643 (SC). 5. We have given careful consideration to the submissions. Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rule has been examined at the outset. The Explanation to this Rule mentions certain goods and services including designs and drawings. It explains the expression "amount of money value of any additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee in relation to sale of the goods being valued and aggregated accordingly", which is found in the text of Rule 6. According this Explanation , the value, apportioned as appropria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s evidencing consensus on the point between LNV Technology and the assessee (appellant), it has to be prima facie held that the costing was done in an empirical manner. 7. The plea of limitation raised by the appellant is not totally convincing inasmuch as the functionaries of the appellant-company gave, confessional statements to the investigators. Had it been bona fide belief of the appellant that they were not liable to invoke Rule 6 for addition of value of the cost of drawings to the assessable value of the subject goods, the functionaries of the appellant should have stated so under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act. It appears, during the period of dispute, the appellant did not disclose the material facts to the department, whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
