Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (5) TMI 714

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... buyer shall be adopted in the case of clearances made to related buyer, accordingly, valuation in terms of Rule 8 was not applied. However, subsequent to passing of the impugned order, there are vital challenges of circumstances i.e. the Rule 8 was amended vide Notification No. 14/13-CE (NT) dated 22.11.2013 and by taking cognizance of Circular, the Tribunal has passed the decision in the case of M/S ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED VERSUS CCE ST, INDORE/ RAIPUR [ 2017 (11) TMI 1385 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] . In view of the fact that so much change have taken placed subsequent to the passing of the order, therefore, the matter needs a fresh look on all subsequent development. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No. 880 of 2011 - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Industries Ltd (Supra) passed the judgments in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd Vs. CCE 2017 (11) TMI 1385 CESTAT and in case of CCE Vs. Surya Roshni Ltd 2017 (357) ELT 978 (Tribunal) wherein, it was held that even though there is independent sale to the un-related buyers, the clearances made to the related person shall be valued in terms of Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, therefore, the demand raised in the impugned order is not sustainable. He placed reliance on the Board Circular No. 975/9/2013-CX dated 25.11.2013. He submits that Board Circular is binding on the department as held in the following judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court: Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 (139) ELT 3 (SC) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... T) 4. On the other hand, Sh. S.N. Gohil Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He also placed reliance on the following judgments: Handy Wires Pvt. Ltd 2015 (329) ELT 169 (Tri.-Mum.) Rado Tyres Ltd 2004 (174) ELT 218 (Tri.-Bang.) BPL Ltd 2000 (124) ELT 836 (T) Rubicon Vs. CCE 1993 (66) ELT 207 (T) 5. Heard both the sides and perused the records. We find that the entire demand was confirmed relying on the Larger Bench judgment in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd (Supra) according to which if the goods are cleared to independent un-related buyer as well as related buyer in such cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates