TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue decided in the case of ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RAIGAD [2007 (2) TMI 5 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], where it was held that provisions of Rule 8 would apply only in case where its entire production production of a particular commodity is captively consumed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal Nos. E/67/10 & 70603/13 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2017 - Satish Chandra, President And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member ( Technical ) S/Shri K. P. Dey, H. K. Pandey, S. Dey, Advocates for the Appellant Shri S. S. Chattopadhyay, Supdt. ( AR ) for the Revenue ORDER Per Shri V. Padmanabhan The appeals have been filed against the Orders-in-Original as per the details given below:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and independent buyers. 4. The department issued two SCNs alleging that the appellant short-paid duty while removing such products to its related buyers-manufacturers by not adding 10% over the cost of production of such products as per Section 4(1)(b) of the CEA 44 read with proviso to Rule 9 [in the manner specified in Rule 8] of the Valuation Rules, 2000 and demanded duty of (i) ₹ 1,14,73,079/- as per the SCN dt.29.08.2008 for the period Aug 03 to March 08 and (ii) ₹ 59,78,176/- as per the SCN dt.30.04.2010 for the period April 09 to March 10, aggregating to ₹ 1,74,51,255/-. 5. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Ranchi, after observing due process of law, confirmed both the demands with interest and imposed penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d with Rule 9, as in the instant case] would apply only in case where its entire production production of a particular commodity is captively consumed . and that in Para 9(a) it clarifies that the provisions of Rule 8 [read with Rule 9 in the instant case] of the Valuation Rules will not apply in a case where some part of the production is cleared to independent buyers. As per ratio laid down by the Hon ble CESTAT, Larger Bench, New Delhi, in Ispat Industries Ltd. (supra) case, the Hon ble CESTAT, Kolkata has decided the following cases: (a) Gangotri Electrocastings Ltd. v. CCE ST, Patna [2013 (293) ELT 395 (Tri.-Kolkata)] (b) SAIL v. CCE Cus, BBSR-II [2010 (251) ELT 571 (Tri.-Kolkata)] (c) Shyam Sel Ltd. v. CCE, Bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
