2017 (5) TMI 1342

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ponents. As per the understanding, scrap generated at the job workers end should have been returned to appellant, but the same was retained by job workers who sell the same directly, for which value at Rs. 4/- per kg is predetermined and adjusted for calculating and paying machined rates to the job workers. Appellants then discharge excise duty on the quantum of the scrap generated at the premises of the job worker on monthly basis. From the investigations conducted by the department, it appeared that during 1.4.2002 to 28.2.2003, against total scrap of 68,70,352.470 Kgs. generated at the job workers end, duty was discharged only on quantity of 43,45,088.370 Kgs. Thus duty was not paid on 36.75%, i.e., more than one-third of the scrap gener....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ability on the scrap, value of Rs. 5.80 per kg alone should be adopted. 4. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts. 5.1 By mutual arrangement, for every kilogram of scrap generated at the job workers end and retained by them, i.e., not returned to the appellant, the latter has adjusted the value thereof by way of deducting the corresponding job charges by Rs. 4/- per Kg. This is the value that has been adopted by the appellant for discharging duty liability on scrap that has emerged at the job workers end. Duty liability has also been discharged on the quantum of scrap so generated, but at a rate of Rs. 4/- per kg, at the end of every month. 5.2 However, such discharge of duty liability was only with respect to the quantum....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....can be no further demand of duty on the generated physically available scrap other than that discharged by appellant on value of Rs. 4/- per kg. In consequence, there will also be no penalty in respect of the duty liability discharged by this manner. So ordered 5.6 Coming to the duty liability on burning / transportation loss, irrecovable scrap, we find that the learned counsel has conceded the same. However, he prays for cum-duty benefit. We find merit in the submission of the learned counsel, since for the quantum in processing loss etc. there is obviously no sale is involved for that matter, no duty liability thereon has been collected by the appellant. Hence, while maintaining the notional value of the quantum involved on such proces....