2018 (10) TMI 456

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appellant Shri M.R. Sharma, AR - for the respondent ORDER Per Bijay Kumar: The present appeal is filed by the appellant against Order-in-Appeal No. BHO-EXCUS-001-APP-450-451-17-18 dated 22.11.2017. The period of dispute is from Feb. 2013 to October 2013 and November 2013 to March 2014. The issue that falls for consideration is whether the duty liability arises in respect of the job....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uty paid by M/s Tata Motors on the chassis. The dispute is regarding valuation of the motor vehicles manufactured by the appellant. During the disputed period, the unit paid the Central Excise duty after determining the value in terms of Rule 6 of Central Excise Rules, but the department was of the view that the valuation is required to be determined in terms of Rule 10(A) of Central Excise Valuat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Order dated 2.11.2017, wherein the Tribunal observed as under: "4. After hearing Shri Hemant Bajaj and Dhruv Tiwari, learned advocates for the appellant and Shri H C Saini, learned DR for the department and on perusal of material available on record, it appears that identical issue has came up before the Tribunal in the assessee's own case as Tata Motors Ltd. and Commercial Engineers & Body Bu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rimary adjudicating authority though the contention was raised before him. 5. In the light of forgoing, we allow the appeal by way of remand to the primary adjudicating authority with the following direction:- (1) No penalty is warranted in these cases. (2) The demand should be recomputed, if necessary, after considering the contention of the appellant regarding non-incl....