TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 1018
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndertaking job work of painting by engaging various contractors on Supply and Apply contracts and effected clearances thereof by adopting value in terms of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by resorting to Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. The Department took the view that since the goods were cleared to the work sites where the appellant had undertaken the Supply and Apply contracts, there is no sale involved in these clearances, therefore the valuations adopted should have been under Rule 11 of the said Valuation Rules. Hence the value could be arrived by deducting the expenses incurred on application of paints (labour charges) from the contract price. The Department put th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s to be followed for arriving at assessable value and discharge of central excise duty. The said Rules are reproduced below: "Rule 8: Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used for consumption by him or on his behalf in the production or manufacture of other articles, the value shall be [one hundred and ten per cent] of the cost of production or manufacture of such goods. Rule 11: If the value of any excisable goods cannot be determined under the foregoing rules, the value shall be determined using reasonable means consistent with the principles and general provisions of these rules and sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Act." 5. From the facts on record we do not find that paints cleared by the appellant are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onditioning of old/used machinery and did not involve sale of the goods. 7. In the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs P.C. Pole Factory [2006(198) ELT 865 (Tri-Mumbai)], the issue involved was valuation of P.C. Poles manufactured by the respondents and used in the transmission of electricity by the respondents themselves. 8. In the light of discussions herein above, we therefore find ourselves in agreement with the stand of the Department that the value adopted by the appellants under Rule 8 of the Central Excise (Determination of price of Excisable goods) Rules, 2000 was not in order and that since the application of paint contains labour costs, the assessable value is to be determined under Rule 11 only after deduction of the value of labour compon....