TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r law merely for garnering revenue that has thereby escaped one of the jurisdictions. By discharging the tax liability on the job work charges as well as by discharge of VAT liability on brought out items used for fabrication at site, the scope for considering the activity as manufacture is eclipsed entirely. In this context of mutually exclusive levies under the scheme of taxation in the Constitution, the activity of the respondent is works contract and hence not leviable to duty under Central Excise Act, 1944. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Excise Appeal No. 36 of 2010 - A/86106/2019 - Dated:- 14-6-2019 - MR C J MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) AND DR. SUVENDU KUMAR PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri A.B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry legislation is beyond his competence and authority. In pursuing this line of submission, he invites our attention to the decision of Tribunal in Burn Standard Co Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta II [2000 (119) ELT 650 (T) ] wherein it was held that the cost of raw materials supplied free of cost must necessarily be added for determining value of goods and informs that this judgment was also followed in Chinttpurni Engineering Works v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow [2003 (154) ELT 427 (T)]. In this connection, attention was also drawn to rule 6 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000, which provides for addition of cost of raw material that are supplied by the buyer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essed and such a distinct identity should be such as are recognised in the trade. Hence, he claims that goods, that are in semi-finished condition and yet to attain its final and marketable form, are not saleable as such, by the buyer. It is further contended that there is no evidence on record that appellant was in possession of machinery or had those installed in their premises for completion of the manufacturing process. 4. Having heard both sides, we find ourselves confronted with a dispute in which the jurisdictional central excise authorities seek to levy duties under Central Excise Act, 1944 while respondent claims leviability under Finance Act, 1994. That the respondent had been discharging service tax liability on jo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
