2018 (3) TMI 1537

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant Sri S.S. Chattopadhyay, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER Per Shri V. Padmanabhan The present appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 60/KOL-V/2011 dated- 15/07/2011. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of various medicines. They have two units. In the first unit i.e. DSM unit, bulk drugs are manufactured and are transf....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate. Accordingly, duty demand was made vide the show cause notice dated 24/07/1998 which came to be confirmed by the authorities below. 3. For the subsequent period from 01/07/1998 to 31/08/2002 also, the Department has disputed the valuation adopted for payment of duty by observing that the appellant has adopted the CAS-4 but profit is to be added to the cost of the material arrived at by cost....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d that the Commissioner (Appeals) has followed the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad Vs. M/s. Raymonds Ltd. [2006 (204) ELT 3 (S.C.) . 6. Heard both sides and perused the record. The first point of the dispute is covering the period 1994-1995 and 1995-1996. During this period, the bulk drugs manufactured in the DSM Unit have been cleared to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and is set aside. 7. The second part of the dispute is covering the period 01/07/1998 to 31/08/2002. The Revenue has no quarrel regarding the determination of the assessable value. Only grievance is with reference to the margin of profit adopted. Different figures have been adopted for different periods. The impugned order holds that the profit margin is required to be adopted as has been held....