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 (11) TMI 462

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... use notice. Regarding valuation - When the goods were purchased by them, they were of bigger dimensions and the goods sold by them are of smaller dimensions and of varying sizes. In view of such position, such goods will fetch far less value compared to the goods purchased by them. The invoices of the goods sold by them are already available with the department and form part of the demand notice. We do not see any reason not to accept the value declared in such invoices. The Revenue has also not produced evidence that the appellant has collected any amount over and above the value declared in such invoices. In view of this position, the invoice value may be accepted and duty computed @ 15% on the declared value. Extended period of lim .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n which they were received, viz. as angles and plates and also take the value at which such goods were received by them. Demand notice dated 22.2.2000 was covering the period 23.7.1995 to 27.9.1996 invoking the extended period of limitation. The case was made based upon an information and visit of the Preventive Branch of the Central Excise Headquarters, Nagpur. The demand notice was confirmed by the original authority. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who ordered for certain pre-deposit. The case was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Thereafter the appellant filed appeal before this Tribunal an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... have paid the duty correctly. 3. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR), on the other hand, submitted that the issue is well settled by the Hon ble Supreme Courts decision in the case of LML Ltd. vs. CCE, Kanpur reported in 1997 (94) ELT 273 (SC), which has again been reaffirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE vs. Bhushan Steels and Strips Ltd. reported in 2010 (257) ELT 5 (SC). He submitted that in view of the said two decisions, the goods cannot be classified as waste and scrap classifiable under heading 7204.90. These items have to be classified appropriately in the respective headings and would, therefore, be chargeable to 15% duty as proposed in the show cause notice. 4. We have considered the rival submission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e that the cut sheets which are used by the appellant do not fall under that category. The definition of sheet, inter alia, states that it has to be a hot or cold-rolled flat product, rolled in rectangular section of thickness below 5 millimetres and supplied in straight lengths. It was not disputed that the offcuts which remain after the parts of the scooter had been manufactured by using the steel sheets no longer retain rectangular shapes. These offcuts are of different shapes and sizes and, in our opinion, they would clearly fall under Tariff Entry 72.10. (emphasis in original) It was held in the above case that the offcuts of steel sheets being of different shapes and sizes would fall under Tariff Entry 72.10 which after re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... spective headings and would be chargeable to 15% duty as proposed in the show cause notice. 6. As far as the value of the goods is concerned, we note that when the goods were purchased by them, they were of bigger dimensions and the goods sold by them are of smaller dimensions and of varying sizes. In view of such position, such goods will fetch far less value compared to the goods purchased by them. The invoices of the goods sold by them are already available with the department and form part of the demand notice. We do not see any reason not to accept the value declared in such invoices. The Revenue has also not produced evidence that the appellant has collected any amount over and above the value declared in such invoices. In view of .....

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