Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (6) TMI 433

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... act that not a single sale of such Assembly has been made by the appellants is irrelevant. The ratio in the above case is squarely applicable to the case before us. We, therefore, have no doubt to hold that in this case the TAs came into existence in manufacture of Tractors by the respondent and the same are excisable goods. We therefore, uphold the levy of excise duty on TAs which came into existence in the course of manufacture of Tractors. - Respondent cannot be accused of any fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts so as to invoke the extended period of limitation clause as per proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Since the Show Cause Notice for demand of duty for the period from 1.8.1996 to 1.6.1998 has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Preventive, Central Excise Commissionerate, Chandigarh on 27.6.2001. It was found that the assessee was not paying duty on T.As. used captively in the manufacture of Tractors of EDC below 1800-CC. 4. A show cause notice dated 31.8.2001 was issued to the respondent alleging that the respondent is liable to pay excise duty on 7014 pieces of TAs captively consumed in the manufacture of Tractor EDC below 1800-CC which was exempt from Central Excise duty upto 01.6.1998. The TAs are separately classifiable under Central Excise Tariff heading 8708 and therefore attracted Central Excise duty @ 15% ad valorem during the period 01.08.1996 to 01.06.1998. The exemption Notification No. 67/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 exempts from payment of duty th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xistence as an independent product and is then put for online assembly along with other components of Tractors. He submits that on 26.7.2001 the officers of Central Excise Preventive took photographs of the assembly which was assembled by putting together the following sub assemblies: a) differential sub-assembly including trumpet I axle sub-assembly. b) Rear cover sub-assembly. c) Gear box sub-assembly. d) Steering sub-assembly. That the sub-assembly has a specific function of transferring energy generated by the engine to its wheels and that it is an integral part of Tractor; and one T.A. is used per Tractor. He relied upon the technical opinion and explanation of the word transmission and contended that T.A. comes into exi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... semblies would not constitute T.A. which is excisable under law. The second argument advanced by the respondent is that they have not sold a single TA and the TA was designed for respondent s Tractor. Therefore, it was not exigible to duty. 8. We have heard both sides and considered the matter carefully. The issue whether T.A. is an excisable good emerging in the course of manufacture of Tractor has been analyzed in detail and settled by the Apex Court in M/s ESCORTS LTD Vs. CCE, Faridabad (supra). Therefore we do not think it necessary to delve into the submissions and various judgments placed before us. The Apex Court in the above case, whose facts are identical to the facts of this case, has held that TA comes into existence during ma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct to excise duty and that there was no fraud willful mis-statement or suppression of facts. We find some force in this argument. In the process of manufacture filed with the department, from time to time the respondent has declared the identifiable sub assemblies. The process of manufacture undertaken by respondent has been made known to the department. It has never been the case of Department that these sub-assemblies were suppressed in the declaration filed and applying the decision in M/s.Escorts Ltd. v.CCE (supra). In such circumstances, the respondent cannot allege of any contumacious conduct warranting invocation of extended period. We, therefore are of the view that respondent cannot be accused of any fraud, wilful misstatement or s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates