Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2006 (12) TMI 46

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ld from their units at other places after their clearance from the place of removal at or about the same time of clearance and, where such goods are not sold at or about the same time, at the lime nearest to the time of removal of goods under assessment. Therefore, he has confirmed the differential duty and imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs under Section 11AC of the CE Act. 2. The appellants' contention is that what was cleared by them were semi-finished goods to their own units. The findings rendered by the Commissioner in the impugned order i.e. semi-finished goods should be valued as hilly finished goods are unsustainable in law. The goods have to be valued as in the condition in which they are removed for further manufacture to the other....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d not attained the fully finished condition. In a circumstance like this, the Commissioner's direction to assess the goods as fully finished goods is not supported by law. The said findings are not sustainable. The goods have to be assessed on the "as in where" basis when they are cleared from the factory to another unit for further manufacture. This view was expressed by this Bench in the case of IFB Automation India Ltd. (cited supra). The findings recorded in Paras 5(d) and 5(e) are reproduced herein below: "(d) Alter carefully going through the relevant Rules, we are of the view that the Commissioner's reasoning is not sound. We shall show it presently. In the present case, the appellant 'A' manufactures at his factory an incomplete pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....charged the duty liability under Rule 8. The Commissioner has given a finding that Rule7 is applicable to the present case. We shall show how Rule 7 is not applicable. We reproduce Rule 7 herein below. "Rule 7 - Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee at the time and place of removal but are transfrrred to a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises (hereinafter referred to as "such other place") from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the place of removal and where the assessee and the buyer of the said goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration for the sale, the value shall be the normal transaction value of such goods sold from such other plac....