AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 715
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly 2008 in the premises of the Appellants and various available documents were verified. On completion of the investigation, proceedings were initiated on various charges against the Appellants. The original authority confirmed the proposals made by the Show Cause Notice regarding short payment of the Central Excise Duty and denial of Cenvat Credit. He also imposed equal amount of penalty on the Appellants. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) substantially upheld the original order. 3. In the present appeal, the Appellants are only contesting two main issues on merits. The first one is regarding the confirmation of Central Excise Duty of Rs. 14,01,631/- on account of unaccounted production and clearance of sanitaryware by them. The secon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irements of the clients. They are separately billed and the value of these seat covers cannot be added for dutiable value of Water Closets. These seat covers are not parts of items manufactured by them. The learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Neycer India Ltd. Vs CCE, - 2005 (192) ELT 620 (Tri-Mad), which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 2006 (193) ELT A22(SC). Further, reliance was also placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE Vs Maharashtra Electronics Corp. Ltd., - 1998 (104) ELT 411 (Tri.). 4.2 Regarding the limitation and penalty, the learned counsel submitted that the Appellants maintained proper records and entered all the transactions. Regarding val....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd given grades; grade (a) which are saleable, good quality products are entered in the RG-I Register; grade (b) is further taken up for repair and re-firing; and whereas grade (c) is a waste and not saleable. On such background, we note that the impugned order did not give a categorical finding as to how the Revenue still sustains the allegation of unaccounted production and clearance of excisable goods. In spite of the factual clarification, as submitted by the Appellants, regarding the treatment of grade (b) and (c) products, the impugned order recorded the non-entry of such products in RG-I Register forming basis of the case against the Appellants. A perusal of the finding recorded in the impugned order (para 8) clearly indicates that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eparately will not have any effect on the valuation of the excisable goods cleared by them. In the case of Neycer India Ltd. (supra), the issue involved was inclusion of value of fittings like handle assembly, ball valve assembly, overflow assembly etc. in the value of ceramics cistern manufactured and cleared by the assessee. The Tribunal held that the value of these bought out items is not includible in the assessable value of cistern. These items are not manufactured by the assessee and these are made of various materials like metal, rubber etc. The Tribunal held that, what is manufactured by the assessee is only the cistern which is made of ceramics. Accordingly, it was held that the fittings which are used in the cistern are not to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....art of the package supplied to the buyer. That remote is fan-specific in matter of valuation since the remote is an additional feature provided with the ceiling fan its value has also to be taken into account. This is because the remote which operates the fan may be an accessory but still it makes value addition and, therefore, its value is liable to be included in the assessable value of the ceiling fan." 9. The Tribunal in the case of Dollar Co. (P) Ltd. Vs Collector of Central Excise, Madras; 1999 (110) ELT 719 (T), has held that Cannula (Nozzle) is to be regarded as part of medicament. The value of Cannula is to be included in the value of medicament. The said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2002 (143) ELT A268 (....