Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (3) TMI 1096 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (3) TMI 1096 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - SSI Exemption - Determination of assessable value of clearance beyond Rs.one crore during the financial year 2001-02 and 2002-03 - Held that:- Issue involved in this case stands decided in the appellant's favour by the earlier judgement of the Tribunal in the appellant's own case reported in [1998 (6) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI] wherein an identical issue was involved and the Tribunal held that though in respect of clearance beyond ₹ 75 lakh in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

05-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. The period of dispute is from 2001-03 to 2002-03. During this period, th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rsed @ 9.6% only. The appellant in respect of the clearance upto Rs.one crore during financial year 2001-02 and 2002-03 paid duty @ 9.6% and received excise reimbursement from the UP Power Corporation at this rate. However, in respect of clearances during these financial years beyond Rs.one crore, while the appellant paid duty @ 16%, they received excise reimbursement @ 9.6% only. The dispute is in respect of assessable value of clearance beyond Rs.one crore during the financial year 2001-02 and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X 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 C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

duty reimbursement @9.6% only, they had paid the duty @ 16% adv. and therefore abatement of duty should be @ 16% adv, by treating the price realized as cum duty price, that in this regard, he relies upon apex court judgement in the case of CCE vs. Maruti Udyog Ltd.-2005 (179)ELT A102(SC) and CCE vs. Srichakra Tyres Ltd.- 2002 (142) ELT A279 (SC), that in the appellants own case for the previous period, the Tribunal in its judgement reported in 1998 (104) ELT 352 has held that while determinin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version