TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ression, so larger period not invocable - E/463-468, 472-512 and others - A-1263-1347/KOL/2008 - Dated:- 16-12-2008 - Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T) and Shri D.N. Panda, Member (J) Appeal Nos. E/463-468, 472-512, 469, 470, 471 513-547/2008 and CO. No. 72, 93, 79, 90, 102, 96, 77, 88, 89, 75, 84, 83, 82, 85, 99, 78, 91, 87, 86, 92, 94, 76, 80, 101, 103, 98, 104, 97, 81/2008 S/Shri J.A. Khan and K.P. Singh, SDRs, for the Appellant. S/Shri Dhanu Kumar, Divisional Manager (Finance), Ravi Raghavan, Advocate with Dinesh Jha, Consultant, A.K. Srivastava, CS R.S Bajaj, CA, for the Respondent. [Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. - Heard both sides. 2. These 85 Appeals filed by the Department and 29 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... propriate, of the following goods and services, whether directly or indirectly by the buyer free of charge or at reduced cost for use in connection with the production and sale of such goods, to the extent that such value has not been included in the price actually paid or payable, shall be treated to be the amount of money value of additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee in relation to sale of the goods being valued and aggregated accordingly, namely:- (i) value of materials, components, parts and similar items relatable to such goods; (ii) value of tools, dies, moulds, drawings, blue prints, technical maps and charts and similar items used in the production of such goods; (iii) value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he departmental representative's contention that, had the drawings not been supplied, the assessee would have been required to incur expenditure in their development which would have then formed part of the assessable value, is not relevant. It is not the department's case the assessee was doing anything other than make forgings according to the dimension of the customers. It was in other words not engaged in design of the products, which it forged. These designs were made by someone else; the assessee's work was to make the forgings. 3. We therefore decline to interfere and dismiss the appeal." 6. From the above Order, we find that it relies on an unreported decision in the case of CCE v. Bharat Forge in Appeal No. E/776/95-A. Un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Motors is not includible in the assessable value of the components. This argument has relevance for the question of limitation which we have dealt subsequently. 8. It is represented by the Respondents that the drawings supplied by M/s. Tata Motors are nothing but dimensions of the component parts inscribed on paper and can have no value. We have seen a copy of the representative sample of the impugned drawing which is reproduced on the next page. A perusal of the same clearly indicates that such drawings are not simple drawings merely conveying the physical dimensions of the impugned components as being made out by some of the Respondents. It is obvious that the drawing contains technical details representing design of an impugned com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... absence of any other alternative amount suggested either by the Departmental Authorities or by the Authorised Representatives of the vendors, the figure given by M/s. Tata Motors after due scrutiny of their accounts, can be relied upon for making the addition towards the cost of drawings, designs etc. Moreover, since the amount has been worked out per each component, the question of amortization of the expenses incurred towards the cost of drawings and designs has in a way been taken care of in arriving at the said figure of 0.085%. 10. The learned S.D.Rs., Shri J.A. Khan and K.P. Singh appearing for the Department have argued that it was in the knowledge of M/s. Tata Motors and their vendors that expenditure has been made towards the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot been done after introduction of the new Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 specifically providing for addition to be made to the value towards drawings, designs etc., supplied free. As such, we are of the considered view that the escapement of the additional duty for the impugned period was not on account of suppression, misstatement etc., but on account of a mistake of law on the part of the assessees as well as the Departmental Authorities. Hence, while holding that the cost of drawings and designs @ 0.085%, as provided by M/s. Tata Motors, is includible in the assessable value of the components, we hold that the demand for the same can only be sustained for the normal period of limitation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
