2018 (12) TMI 430

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Tariff Act, 1985. The dispute, which covers the period June, 2001 to March, 2004, covering Unit-I (Shed No.39) and Unit-II (Shed No.5) of the appellants situated in Guwahati. In these two units the appellant manufactured unbranded Pan Masala in bulk packing. These were cleared availing the Area Based Exemption Notification No.32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999. This exemption is granted in respect of that portion of the Excise Duty which is paid in cash, over and above the portion of duty discharged by utilizing cenvat credit. 2. Clearances were made from Unit -I and Unit-II to appellan's three other Units situated in Guwahati, Baddi (Himachal Pradesh) and Noida (Uttar Pradesh). Since these clearances were made to sister concerns, the valuation....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re summarized below: i) The demands have been made in terms of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. Ld. Advocate submitted that Section 11A ibid has no application for demand of duty in the circumstances of refund granted under Area Based Exemption Notification. To support this view he relied on the following decisions. a) Shree Nath Industries vs. CCE, Jammu [2018(5) TMI 195- CESTAST Chandigarh. b) M/s Bharat Box Factory Ltd. etc vs. CCE, Jammu [2018 (5) TMI 1346-CESTAT, Chandigarh. c) Crystal Corp Protection Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE Jammu [ Final Order No.A/631197/2018-EX(DB) dt. 27.08.2018] d) Nirlon Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai [2015(320) ELT 22 (SC)] e) M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. vs. CCE Mumbai-IV ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e-bar. 6. Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue justified the impugned order with the following arguments. i) The argument raised by the appellant with reference to Section 11A has never been raised before the lower authorities and as such cannot be allowed to be raised at this stage. ii) Ld. Special Counsel asserted that the provisions of Section 11A will be available to Revenue to raise the demand. He argued that all clearances made from units covered by Area Based Exemption are to be accompanied by invoices based on which the downstream unit availed cenvat credit. The provisions of Section 11A can be invoked for demand of any amount paid as duty. iii) He refuted the submission made on behalf of the appellant that the situation ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate from Cost Accountant. The department has proceeded to redetermine the cost of production under their own methodology, but it is seen that cost of production arrived at by the department is also not as per CAS-4 Standard. Under the circumstances we are inclined to conclude that neither of the assessments is made as per the prescribed standard. 9. The allegation of the department is that the appellant has inflated the assessable value, paid more duty than required and availed extra amount by way of refund available to them under Notification No.32/99 (supra). The demands in this regard have also been made under the extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 11A, by alleging suppression of facts. Appellant has pointed out th....