TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (10) TMI 262
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... K. Shankararaman, Member (T)]. - This is an appeal filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Madras against the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras by which the Collector had allowed the appeal filed before him by the present respondent, setting aside the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Madras VI Division. The Assistant Collector's ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... product should not be the basis for working out the value of captively consumed goods. In the appeal against this decision, it is contended that the Collector (Appeals) erred in holding that the price is not based on cost and profit and that the profit earned on the final product should not be the basis of working out the value of the captively consumed goods. Reliance has been placed for advanci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arned on the final product sold. These decisions were on the facts of the particular cases. In the present case the Assistant Collector's decision is not based on the question whether the notional profit on the captively consumed goods can be based on the profit earned on the final product sold by respondent. The Assistant Collector has demanded duty on stators and rotors captively consumed attrib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spute. The Collector (Appeals) has observed that when the show cause notice was issued on 26-2-1988 the costing certificate for the year 1987-88 may not have been available but as the adjudication order was issued only in May, 1989, the costing certificate would have been available. He raised the question why the differential duty or the final duty was not collected on the basis of costing and dir....