Revenue-neutral captive consumption valuation weakens extended limitation and supports waiver of pre-deposit in genuine sales cases

Where genuine ex-factory sales to unrelated buyers are available, their price may be treated as the proper basis for valuing captive clearances, and the proportion of factory-gate sales is immaterial if those sales are bona fide. On that reasoning, a prima facie case arose against allegations of deliberate undervaluation and intent to defraud revenue at the interim stage. The availability of Modvat credit on duty paid for clearances to the related unit also supported the view that the transactions were revenue-neutral, reducing the basis for invoking the extended period of limitation. The stay application was therefore allowed and recovery was stayed during the pendency of the appeals, subject to the undertaking regarding confiscated assets.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants had made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery on the ground that the demand was barred by limitation, in view of the valuation adopted for clearances for captive consumption and the claimed revenue-neutral nature of the transactions.

Analysis: The valuation adopted for clearances to outside buyers was treated as the proper basis for captive consumption also, and the proportion of factory-gate sales was held to be immaterial where such sales were genuine. On that footing, the finding of deliberate undervaluation and intent to defraud revenue was found unsustainable at the interim stage. The fact that duty paid on clearances to the Pithampur unit would be available as Modvat credit was also treated as relevant to the absence of revenue loss. These considerations were sufficient to support a prima facie view that the extended period of limitation may not be invocable.

Conclusion: The appellants were held entitled to unconditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duty demand and penalty at the interim stage.

Final Conclusion: The stay application was allowed on limitation and revenue-neutrality grounds, and the appellants were permitted to retain the disputed relief from recovery during the pendency of the appeals, subject to the undertaking regarding the confiscated assets.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the ex-factory price for genuine sales to unrelated buyers is available and the duty on captive clearances is revenue-neutral because it is available as credit, a prima facie case against invoking the extended period of limitation and demanding pre-deposit can be made out.

---