TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (8) TMI 268
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Earlier it was remanded back by this Bench of the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 934/2002, dated 19-7-2002 in Appeal No. E/812/01. By that order, this Bench had observed that the ld. Commissioner had not excluded the Modvat credit in determining the assessable values of the goods in question as the Certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant was not before the authorities below. The order-in-remand was made as per that order : - "After hearing for sometime with reference to the stay application filed by the party, we find that the matter itself can be disposed off on the limited issue. Accordingly, amount required for hearing the appeal is dispensed with and appeal was taken for regular hearing with the consent of both sides. 2.&em....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to have taken the stand before Hon'ble CEGAT, Bangalore that the adjudicating authority could not allow them the benefit of Modvat credit of duty paid on raw materials when the case was last adjudicated as there was an error committed in the Chartered Accountant's certificate earlier submitted by them. As already mentioned, since Hon'ble CEGAT, Bangalore was led to believe that a wrong Chartered Accountant's Certificate produced earlier resulted in justice not being done to HCPL, the case was remanded for re-adjudication on the basis of a revised and correct Chartered Accountant's Certificate to be submitted by HCPL. Since the case itself is not one of arriving at the correct assessable value on the basis of costing the question of referrin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (1) 2000 (123) E.L.T. 712 (Tri. - Chennai) - M/s. Sundaram Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Madurai (2) 1996 (63) ECR 380 (Tribunal) - CCE, Hyderabad v. Pharmasia Ltd. (3) 2001 (47) RLT 249 (CEGAT - Mum.) - ITC Ltd. & Ors. v. CCE, New Delhi (4) 2000 (122) E.L.T. 71 (Tribunal) - Shah Foods Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad (5) 2001 (47) RLT 607 (CEGAT - Chennai) - CCE, Coimbatore v. Deccan Alloys Ltd. (6) 2002 (148) E.L.T. 341 (Tribunal) = 2002 (51) RLT 822 (CEGAT-Bang.) - Kalyani Ferrous (I) Ltd. v. CCE, Belgaum (7) 2002 (53) RLT 155 (CEGAT - Del.) - Akal Springs Ltd. & Anr. v. CCE, Chandigarh (8) 2000 (120) E.L.T. 24 (S.C.) - Pawan Biscuits Co. (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Patna (9) 2002 (141) E.L.T. 229 (T) = 2002 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l resulting in the alleged scrap was already reckoned in the costing of the raw material taken to work out the sale price of the cylinders and as per Ujagar Prints decision. Therefore, the sale value of the scrap cannot be once again included. It cannot be a reason or and cause to upset the formula of valuation to be adopted as per the Apex Court's decision. We find force in the submissions made by the ld. Consultant and in view of the fact that in spite of a specific direction to consider the costing certificate for the purposes of allowing the Modvat credit deductions as per Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. case [1999 (112) E.L.T. 353 (S.C.) = 1999 (33) RLT 899 (S.C.)] and the direction in remand given to the Commissioner in keeping the other issue....