2008 (10) TMI 532

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant. Mrs. Joy Kumari Chander, learned Joint CDR represented the department. 3. We heard both sides. 4. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs, which are excisable. They cleared certain goods to their sister concern M/s. Jagadale Industries under stock transfer basis. During the audit of the appellant's records for the period from 2003 onwards, it was observed that they did not discharge the duty liability on the goods stock transferred in terms of Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules by adopting 115%/110% of the cost of the production. Therefore, proceedings were initiated against the appellants. The lower authority apart from confirming the differential duty imposed equal penalty under Section 11A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 is not sustainable. 3. MRF Ltd. v. CCE - 2004 (170) E.L.T. 69 (T) Duty demand on the ground that intermediate products cleared to appellants other unit without including overheads viz., advertisement, interest, etc. - Appellants filed cost account certificate based on instructions available at the time - Whatever duty appellants were paying at the manufacturing unit of intermediate goods, was taken as credit by other unit where these goods were taken for manufacture of finished products - No evidence found that appellants had an intention to evade the payment of duty -Impugned order set aside. 4. T. N. Dadha Pharmaceuticals v. CCE - 2003 (152) E.L.T. 251 (S.C.) Held, to invoke the ....