TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT Confirms Duties in Bangalore Tribunal Case</h1> <h3>M/s BHARAT HEAVY PLATES & VESSELS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VISAKHAPATNAM</h3> M/s BHARAT HEAVY PLATES & VESSELS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VISAKHAPATNAM - TMI Issues:- Confirmation of demands of duties based on provisional assessments for the period 1984 to 1986.- Dispute regarding inclusion of value of bought out items, commissioning and erection charges, design and drawing charges, and escalation charges.- Lack of diligence in presenting defense submissions by the appellant.- Appeal against the impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals).- Claim for nominal deposit by the appellant.- Consideration of pre-deposit amount and stay of recovery of balance dues.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore involved the confirmation of demands of duties following provisional assessments for the period 1984 to 1986, totaling Rs.43,92,72,792/-. The dispute primarily revolved around the inclusion of various charges such as bought out items, commissioning and erection charges, design and drawing charges, and escalation charges. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed some demands but remanded the issue of bought out components back to the original authority for reconsideration. The tribunal noted the lack of diligence in defense submissions by the appellant during earlier stages of the proceedings.The appellant made elaborate submissions with supporting documents, particularly emphasizing that a significant portion of the disputed demand related to bought out components that were not received in the factory but sent directly to contractor sites. The appellant argued against the inclusion of these components in the valuation. The appellant also contested the escalation charges, claiming they related to goods supplied and other charges, presenting a strong case against a substantial part of the demand on this ground. However, the appellant acknowledged the lack of documents regarding design and drawing charges.The tribunal carefully considered submissions from both sides and observed that the demand amount would significantly decrease due to the remand of the bought out components issue. While the appellant did not have a strong case for the entire amount of escalation charges, further detailed examination was deemed necessary. Considering the appellant's status as a sick unit undergoing revival, the tribunal directed a pre-deposit of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- within six weeks, with a waiver of the balance of dues and a stay on recovery pending appeal disposal.In conclusion, the judgment addressed the complex issues surrounding the demands of duties, the inclusion of various charges, the appellant's submissions, and the pre-deposit requirement, providing a detailed analysis and direction for further proceedings in the case.
TaxTMI 