2007 (2) TMI 86

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nst Orders-in-Appeal No. 169 & 170/2005 (H-III) C.E., dated 30-9-2005 and Orders-in-Appeal No. 1 & 2/2006 (H-III) Central Excise dated 30-1-2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals-III), Hyderabad. 2. The appellants manufacture cement coated MS pipes, which are excisable. They avail Cenvat credit on the inputs. Under Notification No. 6/2002- C.E., dated 1-3-2002 th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of 8%. The plea of the appellants has not been accepted by the lower authorities. The Commissioner (A) in the impugned order has stated that the only exclusion allowed from the price charged is sales tax and any other tax. He has also given a finding that the provisions of Valuation Rules do not come into the picture while arriving at the price for payment of 8%. The appellants strongly challeng....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed JDR Shri K. Sambi Reddy reiterated that the lower authorities have correctly interpreted Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and the only excludable element in the total price is sales tax or any other tax. Hence, he requested the Bench to uphold the impugned orders. 5. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The appellants manufacture pipes. The duty paid on inputs is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laying and commissioning of the pipes are not includible. When that is the case, there is no logic in saying that for purposes of Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, these costs would not be excluded. The total price excluding sales tax contemplated in Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, cannot be much different from the value as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. Moreover, the....