2017 (7) TMI 488

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te goods cleared to their sister unit. After closing of the account for the period October 2001 to September 2002, the respondents submitted their proposal on 24.01.2003 to finalize the provisional assessment and intimated the differential duty paid by them as Rs. 3,53,101/- and interest as Rs. 70,260/-. The respondents paid the differential duty and interest on 31.01.2003. However, the department on 26.09.2003 requested the respondents to quantify the differential duty on the basis of CAS-4, which was also submitted by the respondents. A letter dated 27.10.2003 was issued by the department to file revised proposal to finalize the provisional assessment after including the administrative expense, advertisement expense, interest expense as p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....58% was fixed. 1.3. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide the order impugned herein held that the appeal filed by the respondent/assesse on the very same order-in-original No. 30/2003 dated 18.11.2003, having been disposed of vide order-in-Appeal dated 12.02.2004, the present appeal filed by the department is not maintainable as the order-in-original has already got merged with the order-in-appeal No. 36/2004 dated 12.02.2004. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) also addressed the merits and dismissed the appeal filed by the department. Hence, the department is now before the Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the department, Ld. AR, Shri S. Govindarajan, AC, reiterated the grounds of appeal. He submitted that the respondent had filed appeal before the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....niformly. I observe that under the general accepted principles of accounting, the factory overhead can be arrived at based on the machine hour rate or man hour rate or on kg rate and accordingly the respondents have adopted the kg rate taking into account only the relevant expenditure incurred in the Banbury department where the Compound Rubber has been manufacture, and hence the quantification of the overheads as per kg rate is correct as per the accepted principles of costing." 4.2. It is also noted by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the respondent has placed on record lot of correspondence between the respondent and the department, which discloses the methods that were proposed to be adopted by the respondent. That, the respondent had b....