TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 1075
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eared soap noodles to their Baddi Unit on payment of duty on the value determined under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 i.e.on the basis of 110% of the cost of production. For determining the cost of production , the practice adopted by the appellant is that they determined the cost in terms of CAS-4 format on monthly basis. In other words, for payment of duty on the goods cleared during a month to Baddi Unit, they adopted the cost for the previous month. At the end of the year, they were also getting the cost of the production determined for the entire financial year through a Cost Accountant and on the basis of the assessable value based on the cost of production, if there was short payment, the same was being made good....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de good, after adjusting the short payment during certain months against excess payment of duty, if any, during other months, that though in course of hearing before the Commissioner the appellant had pleaded that the differential duty has already been paid, no finding has been given, that in any case, the duty demand for the period 2011-2012 raised by the show cause notice dated 8.11.2013 is time barred inasmuch as the Department had issued a show cause notice dated 21.11.2011 on the same ground for the period from 2007-2008 to 2011 to 2012 by invoking extended period and hence, for the subsequent period, the Department could not invoke the extended period just because there was delay in furnishing of the information on the part of the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the appellant has not been considered. It is seen that in respect of the appeal no.E/58715/2013 filed by the appellant against the earlier order-in-original dated 26.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner, wherein an identical issue was involved, the Tribunal vide Final Order dated 7.7.2014 had remanded the matter for de novo decision with the observation that, as is clear from the above, the appellant have taken specific plea that they were preparing annual CAS-4 certificate and were paying the duty on shortfall, if any, after adjusting the excess duty paid by them in some of the months. There is no finding on the above plea of the appellant. If the appellant have actually paid the differential amount of duty, the same would lead to a sit....