TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (10) TMI 483
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs of excisable goods falling under Chapters 52, 54, 55 and 58 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The issue in both these appeals pertains to determination of assessable value of the processed fabrics. The department took the view that the value of pre-shrunk material is required to be taken to arrive at the assessable value while the assessee took the view that the issue was covered in their favour in terms of the judgment rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Gemini Dyeing & Printing Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore - 1997 (91) E.L.T. 195 (Tribunal) wherein it was clearly laid down that the value of the shrunk material alone is required to be taken for assessment. The findings recorded by the Tribunal in Paras 4 and 6 to 9 in Gemini Dyeing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g. All he has said is that the cost of the grey cloth fabric which was taken by the appellant should be added by the appellant. In this view of the matter, the Collector (Appeals) has correctly decided the matter. But, he has come to a wrong conclusion while confirming the orders of the Ass. Collector. Therefore, the duty in this regard has to be worked out taking into consideration the shrunk material as emerged after processing. 8. As far as inclusion of art charges are concerned, both the authorities below have clearly stated that these were collected separately by the appellant from the customers. On a query from the Bench as to whether this finding of fact of the authorities below are controverted in the appeal. 9. The learned Consul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, one has to examine the ratio of the above three decisions in the matter of arriving at the assessable value of the grey fabrics at the time of return of the goods after completing the process. The questions that came up for consideration of a Bench of two Judges of the Supreme Court in 1987 (27) E.L.T. 567 were - whether the process of bleaching, dyeing, printing, (1) mercerizing etc. carried on by a processor on job work basis in respect of grey fabrics and man-made fabrics belonging to the customer and entrusted him for processing amount to 'manufacture' within the meaning of the Central Excises & Salt Act as it stood prior to its amendment by the Central Excises and Salt and Additional Duty of Excise (Amendment) Act, 1980 so as to l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce at the factory gate. The correct assessable value must be the value of the fabric at the factory gate, that is to say, the value at which the manufactured goods leave the factory and enter the main stream.   It is, therefore, necessary to reiterate that the value for the assessment under Section 4 of the Act will not be the processing charge alone but the intrinsic value of the processed fabrics which is the price at which the fabrics are sold for the first time in the wholesale market". It was also held that the selling profit of the trader who subsequently sells the fabrics cannot be made part of the assessable value. 21. In the clarificatory order reported in 1989 (39) E.L.T. 493 the Supreme Court observed that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d be selling the processed goods in the market, would include only the price or deemed price at which the processed fabric would leave the processor's factory plus his profit." The contention of the assessee which was found favour with the Member (Judicial) is that in view of the above observation of the Supreme Court the assessable value of the processed grey fabrics leaving his factory shall be computed on the basis of the declaration given to the processor by the trader regarding his selling price and that when such a declaration is given, it is not open to the Revenue to fix the assessable value by the costing method. 22. I do not find any merit in the above contention since the observation of the Supreme Court as quoted above wo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le value has been made clear by the Supreme Court much before the period in question, it has to be taken that the assessee with full knowledge of its obligation to pay duty on the deemed sale at its factory gate was guilty of wilful suppression of the fact that there would be shrinkage in the course of process and that it has calculated the assessable value without taking into account such shrinkage with intent to evade Central Excise duty. The authorities are, therefore, justified in invoking the longer period of limitation. 24. I agree with the order passed by the Member (Technical) that the case has to be remanded to the original authority to work out the exact amount of differential duty liability on the appellant and the amount o....