2011 (6) TMI 610

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oth sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of yarn and fabrics falling under Chapter Heading 55 of the CETA, 1985. They were clearing yarn from their spinning division for use in the manufacture of grey fabrics in the weaving division. Since the yarn so cleared for captive consumption did not have comparable value, the appellants applied for provisional assessment and paid duty on provisional basis. The Assistant Commissioner finalised assessments relating to the period July, 2000 to March 2001, April, 2001 to March, 2002 and April, 2002 to March 2003 and held that there were excess payments of Rs. 21,86,840/-, Rs. 22,26,216/- and Rs. 12,51,032/- respectively. Consequent to fin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....isaged under Rule 9(b) (v) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and later under Rule 7 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The authorities below have failed to appreciate that the cost sheets prepared by the company in respect of yarn and fabrics did not include the excise duty component and therefore, erred in holding that they have passed on the duty burden. Further, the grey fabrics was cleared without payment of duty and duty paid on the yarn was not availed as credit by the weaving division. The value of grey fabrics declared by the weaving division while clearing to the independent textile processor also did not include the duty paid on yarn. 5. The learned Jt. CDR reiterated the findings and reasoning of the Commissioner (Appeals....