TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide letter dated 24-12-2001 has informed the department about the price increase given to the appellant who had supplied by OE equipment during the period. Proceeding to recover the Central Excise Duty of Rs. 13,73,048/- from the assessee under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act by invoking the extended period were initiated. Penalty was proposed under 11AC and Rule 173Q, interest was also to be demanded under Section 11AB and penal action proposed on the Director under Rule 173Q and 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 vide order dated 10-4-2003, Additional Commissioner confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 13,73,048/- with the interest as proposed in the notice and imposed a penalty of Rs. 13,73,048/- under 11AC on the assessee and pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount of price escalation was never disclosed by the appellants to the Department. In fact, they had not only received this amount from M/s. MUL but had issued supplementary invoices also. But for the investigation by the department officers, these facts could have never come to the knowledge of the department. Thus, the extended period has been correctly invoked in the impugned order. Since it is a clear case of suppression and evasion of duty, the penalty under Section 11AC as imposed by the original authority is also correct in law. 6.2 The appellant no. 1 has further submitted that in any case the amount received on account of price escalation should be treated as community price in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of duty. The penalty imposed upon him in the impugned order under Rule 209A, is therefore, justified." Hence these appeals. 3. When the matter was called today, the ld. Advocate for the appellant in Appeal No. 1941/04 submitted that the appellant i.e. the Director had since expired and the Death Certificate issued under Regulation 12/17 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 in the name of Shri Anil Kewal Hitkari issued by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai was produced which certified that appellant died on 22-12-2004. Appeal No. E/1491/04 therefore abates and is disposed off as such. 4. Considering the matter in the appeal filed by the assessee, it is found that the appellant case is that there was no escalation cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llants did not cooperate to the enquiry being conducted will not alter the law as settled i.e. the price at which the goods were sold to the buyer and there was no consideration for such a sale price other than the price at the time of delivery, then such price would be value. We would therefore, not find any reasons to enhance the valuation to recover of duty especially when the admitted position is that there was no value of escalation clause in the purchase order placed on the assessee. Monetary, a bounty from the buyer and monetary value thereof can be added to the price as a consideration, but not the bounty as consideration which flows much after sales have been affected when no such situation receipt was ever contemplated prior to su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
