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

M/s. Mauria Udyog Limited Versus CCE And ST Delhi-IV, Faridabad

2018 (2) TMI 790 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

Valuation - includibility - freight element - Held that: - the goods were cleared on ex factory basis and no central excise duty has been paid on the freight element - From the order of the adjudicating authority, it is evident that it has applied the Board circular dated 23.8.2007 incorrectly because on one hand there is a finding given that the goods have been cleared on ex factory basis and on the other it has proceeded to examine the three conditions in the said circular which relate only 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

echnical) Present for the Appellant: Shri Y.S. Kumar, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Shri G.S. Dhillon, AR ORDER Per: Devender Singh The brief facts of the case are that the appellant had availed input service credit on outward transportation of the finished goods upto premises of customers. The period involved in the appeal is from May, 2007 to March, 2008. A show cause notice was issued on the ground that such credit was inadmissible and the appellant did not put forth any documents evid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ules, The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority with following observations: 4(iv) In the light of the above judgments and circular, it is evidently clear that the decision of instant case (including the issue of interest and penalty) is dependent upon the answer of the question as to whether or not the findings (supra) of Adjudicating authority in respect of fright charges are valid. I also note .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dings. So, in the interest of justice, the instant case is to be remitted back to the Adjudicating Authority for limited purpose viz. to mention the numbers an date of invoices and Purchase orders as mentioned in his findings given in para 11 of Order-in-Original. The appellant is also directed to produce the relevant records to prove his claim before the Adjudicating authority. Aggrieved from the same, the appellant has filed this appeal. 2. Ld. Advocate for the appellant submits that the facts .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r (Appeals) in his order. On being asked, he confirmed that place of removal in their case is the factory gate and they had collected freight from the buyer. He also invited attention to the purchase order and invoices. However, the purchase order could not be co-related with the invoices. It is to be noted that the Revenue is not in appeal against the remand order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. Ld. AR submits that the fact that the freight was not included in the assessable value for the pur .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| 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