TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used for several years and the same is very much within the knowledge of the Department. It cannot be said that non-inclusion of freight element for payment of duty is on account of any malafide intention on the part of the appellants - there is no justification to extend the demand of duty beyond the normal time limit. Appeal allowed in part. - Ex. Appeal No.263/08 - FO/A/76725/2018 - Dated:- 4-10-2018 - SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And SHRI S. K. PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Sachin Dangaich, Sr.Manager (Tax), for the Appellant (s) Shri A. Roy, Supdt. (AR) for the Revenue ORDER Per Shri V. Padmanabhan : The present appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.03- 04/Kol.VII/08 dated 15.02.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sfer Price for LBO from the Refinery was fixed by Oil Coordinating Committee (OCC), a wing of Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, after dismantling of the administered price mechanism in 1998. Such prices have been adopted for transfer of LBO from the Refinery and duty stands paid adopting such prices ; (ii) He submitted that the transfer price from the Refinery to Bonded Warehouse is inclusive of freight element from the Refinery to the assessee s factory. To support his contention, he refers to a Draft Comment on transfer price, approved by the Additional Secretary in reply to Audit Para raised by CAG to the effect that the Transfer Price from the Refinery to Bonded Warehouse is inclusive of freight element. (iii) He also relies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, for use in such transfer from one refinery to another. The Revenue s view is that the duty is required to be paid on such transfer price after addition of the freight element upto the storage tank of the appellant. Against such a view, the appellant s main contention is that refinery transfer price is inclusive of the equalized freight element from the refinery to the assessee s factory. To support this contention, the ld. Representative of the appellant, only a copy of the Note vide F.No.232/244/93.CX issued by Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance approved by the Additional Secretary, in response to Audit Para raised by CAG on identical grounds, has been produced as documentary evidence. But it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
