TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no suppression of facts on the part of the manufacturer the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum to decide the same within next four months after seeking a report on the subject matter from the Assistant Commissioner of Central excise in-charge of the assessee unit. - E/633/2007-DB, E/683/2007-DB - Final Order Nos. 20338 & 20339/2016 - Dated:- 17-2-2016 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member and Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member Shri M.S. Nagaraj, Advocate For the Appellant Shri Pakshi Rajan, A.R. For the Respondent ORDER M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd., Bevinahalli Village, Koppal Dist., filed appeal against the Order dated 12.6.2007 (issued on 13.6.2007) of the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh invoice-wise amortization amount of pattern charges and differential duty thereon, on castings manufactured, by using the said patterns in question and removed, from the beginning, to the Assistant commissioner of Central Excise, Bellary and request for appropriation of the duty so calculated out of the advance deposit of ₹ 45 lakhs until the entire amount of ₹ 45 lakhs is exhausted. Thereafter, they are directed to include the amortised cost of the pattern in the value of the castings and discharge the duty liability as per provisions of Law. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bellary is also directed to verify the correctness of the differential duty furnished by the said manufacturer and order for the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show-cause notice is upto 31.3.1997. The demand should be restricted to the period mentioned in the show-cause notice. The order travels beyond 31.3.1997 and, therefore, the impugned order is required to be set aside as it is not legal, proper and correct. The Respondent, Commissioner imposed penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- under Rule 173(Q) in violation of direction issued by the Hon ble Tribunal. The Tribunal vide its Final Order No. 1191/2005 had accepted that there was no suppression of fact and hence the penalty and interest was set aside. Hon ble Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner for re-working out the duty as the duty was directly charged on the development charges instead of amortized value of castings. Instead th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eworking/re-quantification of duty after specifically allowing the prayer of time-bar/limitation, when there has been no suppression of facts on the part of the manufacturer namely, M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd., the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum to decide the same within next four months after seeking a report on the subject matter from the Assistant Commissioner of Central excise in-charge of the assessee unit i.e. M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd., who are directed to immediately submit necessary documents on the subject matter to the Central Excise Department. 6. Both the appeals are decided as above i.e. by remanding the subject matter to the Commissioner of C. Excise, with the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
