TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as allowed on account of Revenue neutrality making the question of appropriate valuation academic in the present facts - the impugned order does relate to the valuation of goods for the purposes of assessment. Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. [2017 (4) TMI 881 - SUPREME COURT] has held that where an issue relating to valuation for purpose of assessment arises and the order is passed in breach of natural justice, then the Apex Court will admit the Appeal. The submission that if this Appeal is admitted today then at the final hearing, if this Court holds that the issue of valuation has to be gone into it, the only order would be to remand the appeal to the Tribunal to decide the issue of valuation. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oms, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the Tribunal ). 2. The Appeal as filed by the Revenue urges the following three questions of law : (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law was the Tribunal right in deciding the issue merely on the ground of revenue neutrality when in its earlier order No. A/903904/ WZB/2004/C II dated 7.10.2004, a direction was given to the adjudicating authority to do the valuation of captively consumed goods according to cost Accounting Standard 4r (CAS4) developed by the Institute of Cost of Work Accountants of India read with Board's Circular No. 692/8/2003CX dated 13.02.2003? (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law was the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Central Excise (Valuation) Rules 1975 ( Valuation Rule ). 7. The Respondent arrived at the valuation of its I.C. Engines and parts thereof by adoption of cost construction method as provided in Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Valuation Rules. The Revenue objected to the valuation arrived at by the Respondent. This on the ground that Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Valuation Rules has not been properly applied, as various expenses which need to be included are not included to arrive at the cost of production of I.C. Engines and parts thereof. Thus, the demand by the Revenue for the differential duty payable on the I.C. Engines and parts thereof, cleared for captive consumption to manufacture tractors at Nagpur and Rudrapur. 8. The impugned order dated 13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the following conditions must be satisfied: (i) The question raised or arising must have a direct and/or proximate nexus to the question of determination of the applicable rate of duty or to the determination of the value of the goods for the purposes of assessment of duty. This is a sine qua non for the admission of the appeal before this Court under Section 130E(b) of the Act. (ii) The question raised must involve a substantial question of law which has not been answered or, on which, there is a conflict of decisions necessitating a resolution. (iii) If the Tribunal, on consideration of the material and relevant facts, had arrived at a conclusion which is a possible conclusion, the same must be allowed to rest even if this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding of the impugned order of the Tribunal, we find that the question of valuation though raised in the Appeal before it, was not examined by the Tribunal. This as the Appeal was allowed on account of Revenue neutrality making the question of appropriate valuation academic in the present facts. However, the grievance of the Revenue before us is to the extent that the Tribunal has not dealt with the issue of valuation though it arose before the Tribunal. Therefore, in our view, the impugned order does relate to the valuation of goods for the purposes of assessment. This view of ours also finds support from paragraph 19 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. (supra) in the above case, it has been held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Revenue that paragraph 19 of the Apex Court decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. (supra) only sets out parameters for admission and not maintainability is to our mind hair splitting. There is no dispute in view of the self evident position in law i.e. Section 130 and 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 that an Appeal relating to rate of duty and/or value of goods for purposes of assessment would only be before the Apex Court. In such circumstances, the Apex Court after recording that the sine qua non for the admission of Appeal before it is that the impugned order must relate to the rate of duty or determination of the value of goods for the purposes of assessment of duty. Therefore, not dealing with and/or deciding the issue of rate of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
