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

Commissioner of Central Excise Versus Stedman Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. And Vice-Versa

2017 (9) TMI 697 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Refund claim - rejection on the ground that the cost certificate submitted by the appellant-assessee did not correctly arrive at the valuation to decide 115% of cost of production - Held that: - valuation based on costing can be made for clearances prior to 2003 when the cases were pending - reliance placed in the case of NATIONAL ALUMINIUM CO. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BHUBANESWAR-I [2005 (3) TMI 186 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI]. - Whether the Board circular dt. 1.7.2002 is only clarifica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s not all proposed, discussed or decided by both the lower authorities. Since no proposal was made against the appellant-assessee to change the method of valuation in the proceedings before the lower authorities, we cannot go into the said issue for a decision - appeal dismissed. - Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.E/280/2006, Appeal Nos.E/497/2009 & E/42063/2014 - Final Order No. 42036-42038 / 2017 - Dated:- 12-9-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member ( Judicial ) And Sh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

free samples. The valuation of these free samples was done by them based on value of similar goods cleared, on pro-rata basis. The Board issued clarification on 1.7.2002 stating that the free products cleared by pharmaceutical companies are liable to value at 115% cost of production. On receipt of such clarification from the Board, the appellant-assessee preferred this refund claim stating that they have paid excess excise duty as the value arrived at by them on pro-rata basis is higher than wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the appeal of the appellant-assessee with consequential relief. He upheld the claim of the appellant-assessee regarding method of costing adopted by them. The Revenue preferred appeal against this order which was earlier rejected by the Tribunal due to delay. On appeal by the Revenue, the Hon'ble Madras High Court condoned the delay and restored the appeal for a decision by the Tribunal. 3. We have examined the grounds of appeal by the Revenue. There are two points mentioned in the appeal. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted that the Board has later revised the instruction in terms of Valuation Rules, 2000, vide circular dt. 26.4.2005. As such, circular dt. 1.7.2002 should not be given effect. He submitted that valuation in the present case should have been correctly done in terms of Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules, 2000. 5. The Ld. counsel appearing for the appellant-assessee submitted that the decision of the Tribunal in National Aluminium Co. Ltd. (supra) has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

have heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 8. Admittedly, the first point raised by the Revenue is no more sustainable. The decision of the Tribunal in National Aluminium Co. Ltd. (supra) has been affirmed by the Apex Court. The implication is that valuation based on costing can be made for clearances prior to 2003 when the cases were pending. 9. On the second issue, we note that valuation under Rule 4 / Rule 11 was not a subject matter before the original authority. Neither it was a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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