Appeal disposed with directions for remand, limiting demand to normal period, and excluding penalties.

The appeal was disposed of with directions to remand certain issues for fresh adjudication, limit the demand to the normal period, and exclude penalties. The operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court on 30.06.2014.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Early hearing of the stay application.
2. Applicability of Rule 6 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000.
3. Inclusion of documentation charges, training, training aids, non-recurring expenditure (NRE), and project management charges in the central excise duty.
4. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 64/95 CE dated 16.03.95 for supplies to the Indian Navy.
5. Invocation of the extended period for demand and imposition of penalties.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Early Hearing of the Stay Application:
Revenue sought an early hearing of the stay application due to substantial revenue involvement. Both parties agreed to proceed with final arguments instead of granting a stay. Consequently, the early hearing application was allowed, the requirement of pre-deposit was waived, and the appeal was taken up for a final decision.

2. Applicability of Rule 6 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000:
The appellant argued that Rule 6 was not applicable as there was no additional consideration paid by the buyer. Rule 6 specifies that the value of excisable goods should include any additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee. The learned AR opposed this, stating that documentation charges related to the production and sale of missiles fall under clause (iv) of Explanation (1) to Rule 6. The Tribunal agreed with the AR, noting that documentation charges are an additional consideration and must be included in the valuation.

3. Inclusion of Documentation Charges, Training, Training Aids, NRE, and Project Management Charges:
- Documentation Charges: The Tribunal held that these charges are includible as they relate to the production and sale of missiles.
- Training and Training Aids: These were considered post-sale activities and not includible in the valuation. The Tribunal noted the absence of clear findings regarding the nature and place of training.
- Project Management: This was deemed relatable to the sale of goods being valued and hence includible.
- Non-Recurring Expenditure (NRE): Accepted as related to research, development, and upgradation of missile systems, making it includible in the valuation.
- Hub Extension: The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication as the appellant claimed it was a duty-paid item but had not provided evidence.

4. Eligibility for Exemption under Notification No. 64/95 CE dated 16.03.95 for Supplies to the Indian Navy:
The appellant claimed exemption for supplies to the Navy under Sl. No. 3 and 21 of the notification. The Tribunal examined whether missiles could be considered as stores or required for the construction of naval vessels. Based on a Board clarification, it was concluded that missiles could be required for construction and use on warships. The Tribunal accepted the appellant's eligibility for exemption, noting that certificates from the specified officers had been produced.

5. Invocation of the Extended Period for Demand and Imposition of Penalties:
The Tribunal found that the extended period could not be invoked, nor penalties imposed, as the contract explicitly stated that taxes and duties would be borne by the buyer (Government of India). There was no malafide intention to evade tax. The demand was limited to the normal period, and penalties were not imposed.

Conclusion:
The appeal was disposed of with directions to remand certain issues for fresh adjudication, limit the demand to the normal period, and exclude penalties. The operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court on 30.06.2014.

---