2024 (3) TMI 1279

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m part of the assessable for the levy of Central Excise Duty - suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- The issue is covered in favour of appellant in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BANGALORE VERSUS MAZAGON DOCK LTD. [ 2005 (7) TMI 105 - SUPREME COURT] and M/S CORAMANDEL INTERNATIONAL LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM-I [ 2014 (8) TMI 7 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (A)(2) and (10) of the Central Excise Act, 1955 was upheld. Interest was demanded and equal penalty was demanded both, under Section 11AC of the Act and Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. The show cause notice dated 18.09.2013 was issued alleging suppression of facts, alleging that the appellant is receiving Nutrient Based Subsidy, treating the same as additional consideration and thus form .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... covered in favour of appellant, by the following decisions: Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs Mazagon Dock Ltd., [2005 (187) ELT 3 (SC)] Coramandel International Ltd., Vs CCE, Visakhapatnam-I [2015 (319) ELT 526 (Tri- Ban)] Hindustan Petroleum Corpn Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Guntur [2006 (193) ELT 321 (Tri-Ban)] Vasantdada SSK Ltd., Vs Commissioner of C.Ex, Pune-II [2002 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X