9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain chemicals and substances to their contract manufacturer by discharging duty on such goods on the basis of cost certificates given by the chartered accountant; it is the revenue's case that the respondent has undervalued such goods by understating overheads, labour charges and profit margin as the final products manufactured by contract manufacturer's were sold in entirety to respondent Show cause notices were issued demanding differential Central Excise duty along with interest and for imposition of penalties. The adjudicating authority after following the due process of law dropped the proceedings initiated by the said show cause notice. 3. Learned Departmental Representative would submit that the is not and proper because- a. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ules, 1975. d. The Apex Court, in the case of M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd. 2002(146) ELT 503(SC) held that "therefore the normal price would be the price at which the goods are sold in the market in the wholesale trade. Generally speaking the normal price is the one at which goods are sold to the public". e. The impugned goods, the price of which is under dispute is sold to their contract manufacturers and sister units only and is not otherwise sold to any other independent buyer nor there is any wholesale market for it Therefore, their price as stated above is influenced by other consideration i.e. buy back of entire products manufactured out of these intermediate products by the Assessee themselves. Such reduced price for supply of raw mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufactured on job work basis, should be on Rs.cost Pius profit' basis. This was reiterated in the case of CCE Vs Cosmefarma Laboratories Ltd. 2015 (318) E.LT. 545 (S.C.). The CCE has not taken this fact into consideration. h. The Assessee initially declared the assessable value of the goods based on cost data. They later claimed that transaction between them and Contract Manufacturers is on principal to principal basis and at arm's length and the value declared by them is normal value u/s The Assessee has not produced any other documents / details to consider the said declared value as normal prices On identical facts, in M/s. Poornalaya Electricals Vs CCE 1999(107)ELT 660 (T), the Tribunal accepted the absence of mutuality of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owledge. 5. On consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of records, we find that the issue as stated by both sides is regarding the undervaluation of compound of automatic chemicals dIspatched to their contract manufacturers during the period January 1995 to April 2000. The allegations as stated by both sides are while arriving at the value of aromatic compounds respondent not considered other costs like overhead charges profit demand of differential duty. 6. We find that learned Counsel for the respondent was correct in pointing it to us that the self same issue of the same respondent is decided by the bench for the subsequent period that is clearances effected from May 2000 to March 2003 in final order number A/11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
