Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

CCE, Indore Versus M/s. S. Kumars Ltd.

2016 (6) TMI 716 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Valuation of processed grey fabrics for excise duty - period of dispute is March, 2000 to December, 2000 - Held that:- The Revenue built their case against Respondents based on balance sheet for the year 1997-98. On this ground alone, the proceedings against the Respondents have to fail. - The Respondents have submitted detailed work sheet with costing details. The various components for arriving at cost of grey and cost towards process - loss, processing/packing charges have been specified. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essable value for the impugned period is without any legal basis and arbitrary. We find that during the relevant period, there was no statutory requirement or Boards guidelines regarding submission of CAS-4 Certificate. The standards were incorporated through the Circular dated 13.02.2003 of the Board for future guidelines. - Excise Appeals Nos.2737 and 2738 of 2006-EX(DB) - Final Orders Nos.53669-53670/2015 - Dated:- 24-11-2015 - SMT. SULEKHA BEEVI C.S., MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND SHRI B. RAVICHAND .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssed from main Respondent. A dispute arose regarding valuation of processed grey fabrics for payment of central excise duty. Revenue felt that the manufacturing and other expenses were not properly allocated and added resulting in short levy of duty. Proceedings initiated against the Respondents resulted in original order dated 31.10.2005 confirming demand of ₹ 4,19,012/- with equal amount of penalty against main Respondent and penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on second Respondent. On appeal, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ue. He pleaded that the Respondents failed to consider allied expenses while declaring cost of grey fabrics. They have failed to produce CAS-4 certificates. Ld. AR also stated that earlier proceedings against the respondents are not relevant to the present case. 3. Ld. Consultant, Shri Rahul Tangri appearing for Respondents submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) examined, in detail, the various issues involved in the valuation of processed grey fabrics and correctly set aside the original ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version