9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent ORDER Per: C.J. Mathew 1. This appeal has been filed by M/s Godrej Industries Ltd against order-in-appeal no.SB(57)57/MI/2009 dated 3rd August 2009 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai which has upheld the order of the lower authority confirming demand duty of Rs. 9,11,740/-, along with interest thereon, besides imposing penalty of like amount under section 11AC of Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. 3. Learned Counsel for appellant further contends that the goods so cleared are 'by products' to which Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 would not apply. Furthermore, it is submitted that the value of the final product on which duty liability is demanded, takes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble basis of computation even under rule 8 and find no law in the valuation adopted by assessee. On revenue neutrality, we find that the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise v. Special Steel Ltd [2015 (329) ELT 449 (T)] has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Vapi v. Tarap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
