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

2016 (3) TMI 893

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hort duty. Secondly, it seen that the respondent had produced various documents before the first appellate authority in order to justify their stand of the correctness of the valuation adopted and discharge of duty liability. There is nothing on record to show the said factual position is controverted by the Revenue.Also the first appellate authority has correctly come to the conclusion that there cannot be any suppression of facts or misstatement or collusion on the part of the respondent for invoking the extended period, for the simple reason that the final products manufactured by the respondent are cigarettes, which during the period, was under physical control of the departmental officer, who is regularly posted at the respondent's .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s, the expenses of which needs to be included. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demands raised with interest and also imposed penalties. Aggrieved by such an order an appeal was preferred to the first appellate authority who set aside the impugned order before him on limitation as also on merits. 5. The learned departmental representative after giving us an overall picture of the facts of the case, submits that the respondent had intentionally kept back the information regarding various expenses which should have formed part of the cost of the product i.e. captively consumed products. He would then refer to the grounds of appeal, and submit that the appellant even after being directed to calculate the assessable value properly in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the respondent had produced various documents before the first appellate authority in order to justify their stand of the correctness of the valuation adopted and discharge of duty liability. There is nothing on record to show the said factual position is controverted by the Revenue. 6.3. Findings recorded by the first appellate authority on this point are very detailed one and are based on factual matrix, which we reproduce: 12. I have carefully considered the grounds of appeal, oral/written submissions and law governing the subject matter. The invoices and also, price lists for the year 1998-99 and 1999-2000 have been accepted by the Department, thus, the Section4 value was available during the assessment period and sales were a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inted out by the Department. Also, the appellants in their letter dt. 12.11.2001 and dt. 09.11. 200 , contended that assessable value of the goods falling under Chapter 48 and Chapter 32 were already accepted by the Assistant Commissioner by way of adjudication process, hence the question of revision of assessable values based on costing basis d ocs not arise. Appellants in their letter dt. 7.12.2001 submitted that in view of Notification No.4/94 (NT) dt. 01.03.1994, the mandatory provisions of submissions of price list and approval thereof by the proper officer i.e. Divisional Assistant Commissioner was substituted by filing price declaration in respect of packing materials and printing inks were subject to scrutiny by the Divisional Assis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r captive use as well as for outside clearance. The said declaration was not challenged by Assistant Commissioner or A.D. (Cost). The appellants were working under direction of A.D. (Cost) as reported by him in his report dt. 10.11.1993 based on which Order-in-Original bearing dt. 31.07.1997 was passed. The said direction or order is accepted by appellant. Unless the Price List declaration is challenged by proper officer, no allegation of under valuation will sustain. No show cause notice has been issued to revise the price declaration, it is not possible to allege short levy even during the applicable normal period. Neither the Order-in-Original passed by Assistant Commissioner nor report of A.D. (Cost) was challenged, hence, these orders/ .....

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