9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR) For the Appellant Shri Rajaram Ramanan, Consultant For the Respondent ORDER Per Madhu Mohan Damodhar The facts of the case are that M/s. Triumph International India Pvt. Ltd., the respondents herein are a 100% EOU and manufacturers of "Ladies Knitted Brassier". Finished goods were first cleared to the distribution centre located in the same premises of the EOU on payment of duty and from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. While arriving at this decision, the adjudicating authority found that the amount claimed under "General Overhead" and "Margin" at 18% and 3% respectively appears to be nominal and hence allowed the said deductions. Deductions were also allowed for transport / insurance / packing at 3.1%, BCD at 50% and CVD at 8.24% . Revised differential duty of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not invoked in the SCN, the original authority has travelled beyond the scope of the notice to confirm the differential duty under Rule 7 ibid. Aggrieved, department is in appeal before this forum, inter alia on the following grounds : (i) Duty exemption to EOU in terms of Notification No.30/2004 is not correct. (ii) Appellate authority's finding that adjudicating authority has travelled beyon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or production of a like article in India is not necessary. For quantification of additional duty in such a case, it has to be imagined that the article imported had been manufactured or produced in India and then to see what amount of excise duty was leviable thereon." We find that the CESTAT has also followed the very same ratio in a number of decisions, for example CCE Salem Vs Blue Mount Textil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
