TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 334
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the same on payment of Central Excise duty. For specific customers the value which was charged by them was lower than the value which is charged by them for the same grade and quality of final products to other customers on the basis of validation of advance licence in their favour. During the relevant period the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of IFGL Refractories Ltd. vs. CCE - 2001 (134) ELT 239 (Tri-Kolkata) was holding fort, on which reliance was placed by the appellant during the material period. On the appeal, the said judgment and order of the Tribunal was upturned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 09.08.2005. Lower authorities directed the appellant to pay the differential dues immediately by a letter dated 04.01.2006. Appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....much as after giving details, the lower authority has issued a show-cause notice only on 13.04.2007 by invoking extended period. He would submit that invocation of extended period for the demand of duty in this case does not arise. He would rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of O.K. Play (India) Ltd. vs. CCE Delhi III - 2005 (180) ELT 300 (S.C.)and Cosmic Dye Chemical v. Collector of Central Excise - 1995 (75) ELT 721 (S.C.)for the proposition that when the department was aware of the clearances made by the assessee it cannot be considered as mis-statement or suppression and more so willful intent to evade duty. It is his submission that the entire demand set aside as the show-cause notice wrongly issued by invok....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... advance licence in favour of the appellant, would not amount to any additional consideration flowing from the customer to the appellant. It was also held that the benefit gained by the appellant by reasons of such surrendering of licence is to be construed as not an additional consideration. The said view of the Tribunal was reversed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on an appeal filed by the Revenue and the said judgement was delivered on 09.08.2005 and reported at 2005 (186) E.L.T. 529 (SC). 6.2 In our consideration view and on perusal of the records, we find the show-cause notice dated 13.04.2007 invoking extended period seems to be erroneous, in as much as the invoices and the documents which are produced before us indicate that the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e issue involved in this case was the question of interpretation and had to be settled at the hands of the Hon'ble Apex Court, we hold that the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority is unwarranted, therefore, the penalty is set aside. 6.6. The appeal is disposed of as indicated here-in-above. (Pronounced in open Court on 26.12.2014) Editor's Note: Typed as per certified copy. Per: P K Jain: I have gone through the order of the learned Brother. While I agree with the conclusion drawn however, I would like to add that consequent to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of IFGL Refractories Ltd. (supra), Revenue has written a letter to the appellant on 04.01.2006 directing him to workout the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the transaction value as per sec 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 road with CEX valuation? Decemnation of price of excisable goods) Rules, 2000. The Hon'ble Apex Coon in the Civil Appeal no.4472 of 2001 dud.05.08.0 ha) observed that surrendering of advance licence in favour of supply of goods amounts rot flow of additional considération Gomebuyer to seller. In the instant case there appears to be clear variation in assessable value cleared to the above buyers and others. In the guise of deemed export as compared to clearances to other companies indicating undervaluedion matting in short payment of central excise duty as per the judgement of Hone Supreme Court This act ....