TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 120
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he petitioner Mr. M. Dwivedi i/b. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly for the respondent ORDER P. C. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges that part of the order dated 29th October, 2014, which, according to the petitioner, contains an adverse remark and one letter dated 6th April, 2015 issued by the second respondent rejecting a miscellaneous application.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....afide conduct of the petitioner, this remark should be deleted. 5) On the other hand, it is submitted that the remark was justified. Inasmuch as, the petitioner was found to have not disclosed the value of dies/fixtures in the declared value of parts/components. This resulted in short payment of the Central Excise Duty. It is in these circumstances that the remark was inserted and it does not cau....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner before us is a subsidiary unit of M/s. Tata Motors Limited engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts and components. They were receiving dies/fixtures free of cost from M/s. Tata Motors Limited for use in their manufacturing process, but failed to include the amortized value of such dies/fixtures in the final value of parts/components manufactured. That is how, being aware about ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... auto parts/components for M/s. Tata Motors Limited, where dies/fixtures were being supplied by M/s. Tata Motors Limited. They were, therefore, aware about inclusion of value of such dies/fixtures in the value of parts/components manufatured. 7) We do not think that in the given facts and circumstances, there was any need to record a finding that there is a suppression and mis-declaration of fact....