2017 (11) TMI 1246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , Adv. For the Respondent : Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) ORDER The appellants are aggrieved by order dated 20.03.2009 of Commissioner (LTU), Chennai. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various petroleum products liable to Central Excise duty under Chapter 27 of Central Excise Tariff Act. They cleared the products on payment of duty to M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (in short, " .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m is that since their clearance is exclusively to a holding company and the transaction is between related party, the value cannot be determined in terms of main section 4(1)(a). The original authority in the impugned order concluded that the transaction value between the appellants and M/s. IOCL is available and as such, the same has to be considered for assessment. Accordingly, the differential .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts reported in 2004 (240) E.L.T. 372 (Tri. -Chennai). The further appeal filed by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dismissed keeping the question of law open. As such, the learned counsel prayed for setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. 3.   Authorised Representative for the Revenue Shri B. Balamurugan reiterated the findings of the original authority .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ice charged by them from M/s. IOCL is higher than the price of M/s. IOCL. The Tribunal relied on various cases to arrive at the above conclusion. The said decision of the Tribunal was appealed against by the Revenue and the Hon'ble Supreme Court  dismissed the civil appeal, though, it was observed on the facts and circumstances of the case, the question of law is left open. 2016 (342) E.L .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... companies, for further sale. Admittedly, the appellants are a subsidiary of M/s. IOCL. They are interconnected companies. 7. Following the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the appellant's own case, on similar set of facts, we find that the impugned order is not legally sustainable. The same is set aside and appeal allowed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
Case laws, Decisi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X