2018 (10) TMI 823

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....02.2018 which covered the period January, 2016 to June, 2017. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in fabrication of bodies of motor vehicles falling under Chapter heading 8704, for original equipment manufacturers such as Tata Motors Limited (TML). The chassis was supplied free of cost by TML on payment of applicable Central Excise duty on which the cenvat credit is availed by the appellant. After building the body, the finished vehicles are cleared back to TML on payment of duty. The dispute in the present appeals relate to the valuation adopted by the appellant for payment of duty on such manufactured motor vehicles. The duty was paid by the appellant on the basis of the cost construction, in line with the decisi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... time limit sanctioned by Section 11A. The same issue of valuation has been raised by Revenue by issue of various show cause notices right from 2008 onwards and hence in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory vs. CCE, AP -2006 (197) ELT 465 (SC), the appellant will be entitled to the demand being restricted to normal time limited. 5. Ld. AR for the Revenue justified the impugned order. 6. The issue of valuation of the motor vehicles manufactured by the appellant, on job work basis on the chassis received after payment of duty from TML, has been settled in various decisions. The Tribunal has held that the valuation is required to be determined in terms of Rule 10A of the Central Excise Val....