Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (2) TMI 139

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that: - The appellants have paid duty on the assessable valueworked out by taking into account the cost of materials plus conversion cost as laid down in the case of Ujagar Prints. The principal manufacturer (M/s.Marico) used the bottles in its factory for filling coconut oil - It needs to be mentioned that Rule 8 applies when goods are not sold. The goods (HDPE bottles) are sold by appellant to M/s. Marico. The appellant does not captively consume the goods nor does M/s.Marico consume it on behalf of appellant. Similar issue decided in the case of ADVANCE SURFACTANTS INDIA LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., MANGALORE [2011 (3) TMI 1380 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], where it was held that provisions of Rule 10A can be brought into play only when ther .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7 applying Rule 8 and thereafter under Rule 10A(iii) r/w Rule 4 / Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 wherein the appellant is required to pay duty @ 110% of the cost of production. Show cause notices were issued raising the above allegation and proposing to demand differential duty for the period 2003 04 to 2008 09. After adjudication, the original authority confirmed the demand, interest and also imposed penalties. Aggrieved, the appellants filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the same. Hence these appeals before the Tribunal. 3. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri Ramnath Prabhu submitted that Rule 8 is not applicable to the valuation as the same app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... conversion basis as per cost certificate given by M/s.Marico. the bottles are manufactured without caps. The conversion charges include the profit margin and therefore the addition of notional profit of 10% to the cost does not arise. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Advance Surfactants India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore 2011 (274) ELT 261 (Tri. Bang.). He also submitted that the legal position has been maintained by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs. Rolastar Pvt. Ltd. 2013 (298) ELT A186 (SC). 4. The ld. AR Shri K.P. Muralidharan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. The issue posing for considera .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upon the cost of material plus processing charges prior to 1-4-2007 when the provisions of Rule 10A were inserted into the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. It is also undisputed that the said LABSA is returned back to M/s. HUL for further consumption in their factory premises for manufacturing of soaps and detergents. It is nobody s case that LABSA consumed by HUL is on behalf of the appellant herein. 7. On these factual matrix we need to appreciate the provisions under Rule 10A, which is reproduced herein under :- RULE 10A. Where the excisable goods are produced or manufactured by a job-worker, on behalf of a person (hereinafter referred to as principal manufacturer), then, - (i) in a case where the goods are sold by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ns a person engaged in the manufacture or production of goods on behalf of a principal manufacturer, from any inputs or goods supplied by the said principal manufacturer or by any other person authorised by him. 7.1 It can be seen from the above reproduced provisions that provisions of Rule 10A can be brought into play only when there is a situation where excisable goods are produced or manufactured by a job worker on behalf of a person and cleared to the buyer of the principal and/or cleared to a depot or a consignment agent. The intention of the Legislature was to capture the tax on the goods, on the value of the said goods when cleared to the ultimate consumers. In the case in hand, we find that provisions of Rule 10A(i) and (ii) d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates