Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessable value of intermediate goods cleared to sister units was correctly determined on cost construction basis, and whether the demand, penalty and interest were sustainable in view of revenue neutrality and limitation.
Analysis: The clearances were to sister units of the same company and the duty paid by the manufacturing unit would have been available as Modvat credit to the receiving units, making the transaction revenue neutral. In such a situation, absence of motive to evade duty and absence of wilful suppression negatived invocation of the extended period. The assessee had filed price declarations under Rule 173C and the department had acknowledged them. The Tribunal also found that the Commissioner had not correctly applied the CBEC circular governing cost-based valuation, since the profit margin had been worked out on an improper basis instead of being linked to the previous year's margin applied to the relevant year's cost. Departmental authorities were bound by the circular.
Conclusion: The demand was not sustainable either on merits or on limitation. The penalty and interest also could not survive.