2016 (10) TMI 64

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aw material, packing charges and processing charges, for manufacture of the subject goods.The appellant has imported raw materials through Visakhapatnam Port with a total declared value of Rs. 11,86,269/-. In separate proceedings,Commissioner of Customs, Visakhapatnam vide Order in original No.20/2001,dated 13-12-2001 enhanced the value of the above imported raw materials from Rs. 11,86,269/- to Rs. 19,12,550/- on the ground that the cost of raw materials was undervalued and consequently customs duty leviable thereon has been increased from Rs. 7,15,740/- to Rs. 11,75,400/-. Therefore, the department held that the enhanced cost of raw materials (Rs.11,86,021/-) imported under bill of entry mentioned supra should form part of assessable valu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nvocation of Rule 6 of Central Excise Determination of Value Rules 2006 but the adjudicating authority as well as the appellant authority confirmed the demand under the said Rule which is not permissible and beyond the scope of show cause notice. In this context, appellant wishes to place reliance on the following citations. - CCE, Nagpur Vs Ballarpur Industries Ltd. 2007 (215) ELT 489(SC) - CCE, Delhi Vs Sharp Menthol(India Ltd 2015 (328) ELT 543 (Tri-Del) 2.3 Notice is time barred for the reason that the issue involves interpretation and the show cause notice itself was based on an adjudication order of Customs. 2.4 The learned advocate also submitted that the matter is fully covered in their own case, the Tribunal vide Final Order ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by the Bench in para 3 of the order. "3. In the present case, it is the case of M/s GDOL that their relationship with M/s REPL was on principal-to-principal basis and that they had only purchased the goods from M/s REPL in terms of the sale and supply agreement entered between them. The transaction was a normal commercial transaction and was not in the nature of job work in so far as M/s REPL were concerned. We have found a valid point for M/s GDOL. They did not supply any raw material or capital goods to M/s REPL for the manufacture of the subject goods, nor did they provide work force for the purpose, Deputation of supervisors by them to the factory of M/s REPL did not make any dent in the commercial nature of the transaction between....