TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... smissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. E/50711/2014-EX[DB] - A/70635/2019-EX[DB] - Dated:- 5-3-2019 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR) for Appellant Shri A.K. Prasad, Advocate for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The above stated appeal is arising out of common Order-in-Original No.05-11/COMMR/LKO/CX/2013 dated 23/09/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, Lucknow. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent were having three manufacturing units. All the units were having separate independen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alue of such goods under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, respondents were required to pay Service Tax, amount at prescribed rate of 8 or 10% during the relevant period. Therefore, respondent were issued with 7 show Cause Notices. The details of which are as follows:- S. No. SCN No. Date Unit of the Noticee Period Amount/Duty involved (in Rs.) 01. 18/Commr./LKO/CX/11-12 dt. 22.06.11 Unit No. IV January 08 to July 10 ₹ 4,92,69,957/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use Notices were as stated above in the table in addition to the said demand. The Show Cause Notices also demanded short paid Central Excise duty which described in the above stated table as in respect of stock transfer. The issue Involved was that the final products were sold by the respondent to independent buyers and at the same price the final products were also transferred to their other unit without involving procedure of sale. It appeared to Revenue that the assessment value should be on the basis of assessable value arrived at by following the procedure laid under Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Value) Rules, 2000. The said Rule provides for arriving at the assessable value at 110% of the cost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provides that the principal manufacturer undertakes to pay duty of Central Excise on the goods processed by a job worker. It is an admitted fact that semi-processed goods were received by the respondent which were subjected to job work and were returned to the principal manufacturer and principal manufacturer was required to pay Central Excise duty on the same since the goods were being subjected to duty of Central Excise at the hands of principal manufacturer and therefore they cannot be termed as exempted goods or attracting nil rate of duty, attracting provisions of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Further, the said Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 provides for collection of amount equal to 8 to 10% of the value at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said case, which is as follows:- The issue referred to the Larger Bench is whether the assessable value in respect of goods which are transferred to another plant of the same assessee is required to be determined as per Rule 4 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 or as per Rule 8 of the said in a case where the same goods are also sold to independent buyers? He has further taken us through the decision in the said case recorded at Para 9, which is as follows:- In view of what we have observed above, we answer the reference in the following terms : (a) the provisions of Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules will not apply in a case where some part of the production is clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
