2017 (12) TMI 1077

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cal ) Shri B.L. Narasimhan for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan ( Joint Commr. ) AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar Above stated appeals are directed against common impugned Order-in-Original No. 16/Commr./GZB/2007 dated 28.03.2007 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad. Therefore, they are taken together for decision. 2. The appellants were engaged in manufacturing of IC Engines for two wheeler primarily for supply to M/s Majestic Auto Ltd. (hereinafter referred as MAL) Revenue conducted certain investigations against the manufacturer appellant and issued them with show cause notice dated 30.11.2005. The allegations in the show cause notice were that the appellant had paid M/s MAL Rs. 5,65,11,505/- towards R & D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e sold by the appellant to M/s MAL were sold by M/s MAL to their buyers and 40% of such difference in sales price and purchase price by M/s MAL was shared with the appellant and that being additional consideration should be included in assessable value and Central Excise duty on the same should be charged. On account of said allegations there was a demand of Rs. 80,99,242/- in the said show cause notice. On contest show cause notice was adjudicated through impugned Order-in-Original. Appellant submitted their defence through communications dated 23.01.2006 and 25.01.2006 before the Original Authority. On contest the demand was confirmed and equal penalty was imposed further penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs each under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessable value for demand of Central Excise duty. He has also submitted that the show cause notice is time barred since entire transaction was within the knowledge of department and in fact there was a show cause notice also issued to M/s MAL dated 16.10.2002 for receipt of consideration of Rs. 5,65,11,505/- and, therefore, the show cause notice dated 30.11.2005 was time barred. 4. In respect of personal penalty learned counsel for appellant has submitted that personal penalty was imposed under Rule 26 whereas there was no proposal for confiscation of any goods and personal penalty under said Rule is applicable only on the person who deals with such goods which are liable for confiscation. Therefore, he has submitted that personal penal....