TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (7) TMI 55
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom billets manufactured in their mini steel plant; (ii) They were manufacturing wire rods from billets purchased from M/s Ispat Ltd.; (iii) They were also manufacturing wire rods on job work basis from billets received from TISCO, Jamshedpur and clearing the same for further use in their own units at TWP Tarapur and Borivali. 3. In all the three categories, the appellants were clearing wire rods to their own units at Tarapur and Borivali. During the course of audit, it was noticed that the appellants were under valuing the wire rods cleared to their own units at Tarapur and Borivali. On being asked by the department, the appellant furnished the debit notes and invoices for conversion charges billed to TISCO, Jamshedpur, vide their....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise Act. The said show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide his order dt. 18.12.2005 confirming the demand along with interest and imposition of penalty equal to the duty on the appellant. The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order before this Tribunal. 4. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that they are manufacturing wire rods in their Tarapur factory out of billets manufactured from scrap in their own unit, from the billets purchased from M/s Ispat Ltd. and M/s TISCO, Jamshedpur. In addition, they are also manufacturing wire rods from billets supplied by M/s TISCO Jamshedpur on job work basis. The wire rods manufactured by them are cleared to appellant's units at Borivali and Tarap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nto wire rods in case of TISCO Jamshedpur whereas the cost in respect of other wire rods comes to Rs.1491/- PMT. After adding 15% profit i.e 223.65 the appellants have paid the duty in respect of interplant transfer at rate of Rs.1714.65 PMT. He pointed out that therefore the appellants have paid more duty for the period December 2000. Similar, situation exists in respect of the entire period in dispute. The appellants have not charged the conversion cost from TISCO but they have charged the job charges/conversion charges which is inclusive of cost of conversion + profit. He further contended that the entire exercise is revenue neutral if any duty is paid by them the same is available as CENVAT credit to the recipient unit. He also pointed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r are to be treated as conversion cost in the case of interplant transfer to their sister units at Borivali and Tarapur. Therefore, the duty has been correctly demanded and confirmed in the show cause notice. As regards to the argument of revenue neutrality, the submitted that revenue neutrality will not be sufficient to hold that there was no intention to evade duty. As regards, the contention of the appellant on the time limitation, the learned adjudicating authority has discussed the issue in detailed in para 34 & 35 of the adjudication order and it has been held that failure to declare necessary information will amount to suppression of fact and such the extended period has rightly been invoked by the adjudicating authority. 6. After....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lants that the conversion charges in respect of goods supplied to TISCO Jamshedpur included the element of profit also. The Commissioner has confirmed the demand holding in para 25 of the order that appellants were not able to explain and substantiate the difference between the cost of conversion adopted by them in respect of interplant transfer to Borivali and Tarapur units and the conversion cost actually charged from TISCO Jamshedpur, which the department has detected while scrutinizing the debit note issue by the assessee for the said process. The Commissioner has held that higher amounts are shown as a conversion cost in those debit notes as compared to the lower conversion cost applied by the assessee while computing the cost of produ....