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 (3) TMI 1096

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riving at the assessable value. This decision has been followed in two more final orders in the appellant's own case. Following the above orders of the Tribunal, we hold that the impugned order is not sustainable. The same is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No.E/3235/2005-EX - FINAL ORDER NO.51199/2015 - Dated:- 23-3-2015 - Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) And Mr.S.K.Mohanty, Member (Judicial) For the Petitioner: Shri Mayank Garg, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri R.k.Grover, AR ORDER PER: RAKESH KUMAR The facts leading to the filing these appeals are, in brief, as under: 1.1 The appellant are manufacturer of ACSR conductors and AAAC Weasel conductors chargeable to central excise duty. T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble value as ₹ 100/-, they took the assessable value as (109.6 x 100) w 116. The department, however, was of the view that in respect of clearances beyond Rs.one crore, the duty should have been abated at the rate of 9.6% only i.e. at the rate at which the reimbursement was received. It is on this, that the Deputy Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dt.3.3.2005 Confirmed the duty demand of ₹ 3,34,145/- against the appellant alongwith interest on it under section 11AB and imposed penalty of equivalent amount on them under section 11AC. On appeal to the Commissioner, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal, confirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Shri Mayank Garg, Advocate, learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sagar Spun Pipes Vs.CCE, Aurangabad reported in 2014 (305) ELT 179 wherein it was held that when the assesse even after crossing limit of SSI exemption, had not paid duty or had paid duty at the lower rate, price realized by them cannot be treated as cum duty price and the benefit of cum duty price cannot be given to them. He also emphasized that even if according to the exemption notification, after crossing the limit of Rs.one crore in any financial year, duty was payable @ 16/% it is the duty which was actually realized from the customers which should be excluded from the assessable value . 5. We have considered the .....

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