2004 (8) TMI 615

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nterprises Ltd. manufacture plastic moulded components with the help of moulds as per specification provided by the customers; that sometime, the moulds are provided to them free of cost by the buyers of their finished goods; that the Additional Commissioner under the Order-in-Original No. 19/01, dated 1-10-2001, had confirmed the demand of duty amounting to Rs. 12,05,623/- and imposed a penalty of equivalent amount on the ground that the cost of moulds, supplied free of cost by the buyer, had not been included in the assessable value of their finished goods. The learned Advocate, further, mentioned that out of the total demand confirmed against them, they are not challenging the demand amounting to Rs. 7,65,291/-; that the disputed duty of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct of inclusion of cost of such moulds in the assessable value has not been disputed by the appellants. The learned S.D.R., further, submitted that the revenue has also filed the - appeal as the Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty from Rs. 12,05,623/- to Rs. 25,000/-; that as there was suppression of facts, the mandatory penalty under Sec. 11AC of the Central Excise Act equivalent to the duty involved is imposable on them. He relied upon the decision in the case of Pee Aar Steels (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Meerut, 2004 (170) E.L.T. 406 (All.) = 2004 (93) ECC 633 (All.) and Procter & Gamble Hygiene & Health Care Ltd. v. C.C. & C.E., Bhopal, 2004 (165) E.L.T. 4 (M.P.). 4.We have considered the submissions of both the sides. As the asse....