TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 1024
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ispute pertains to the factory of the appellant situated at Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata. They have other manufacturing units located at Bhasa (Bishnupur) and Sahibabad. During the period of dispute i.e. April, 2003 to October, 2007, the appellant manufactured and cleared certain excisable goods from Diamond Harbour Factory on stock transfer basis to their other sister units for carrying out further manufacture. The dispute in the present case is regarding the valuation to be adopted for payment of Central Excise duty on such stock transfer. During the course of Audit, the Departmental officers, after scrutiny of records, came to the conclusion that the valuation has not been properly adopted in accordance with the CAS-4 specification. Sin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the appellant. It is the view of the Department that the value arrived at by the appellant as per CAS-4 Standards, is required to be further loaded with the amount of freight payable for transportation of the goods from the Diamond Harbour Unit to the sister units. He further submitted that there is no basis for the stand adopted by the Department. (iii) In respect of one of the items i.e. PVC Waste (PVC Granulated Chips), these goods have been cleared not only to their sister units, but also to certain independent buyers. In this connection, it is the stand of the appellant that the valuation of such goods can be done on the basis of value adopted for clearance to independent buyers as decided by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....luation Rules, 2000. The Department, during Audit, formed an opinion that the valuation has not been done in terms of the above Rule and in terms of CAS-4 Standard prescribed in this regard. The appellant has since reworked the valuation of the goods cleared during the disputed period in terms of CAS-4 Valuation and has admitted the liability and paid the differential duty to the extent of Rs. 46,44,174/-, but the adjudicating authority has taken the view that in addition of the amount admitted as payable by the appellant, further differential duty is required to be paid by including freight, which is payable for transfer of the goods from the Diamond Harbour Unit to their other sister units. We find no legal basis for addition of this frei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rocessing. Most of the fabrics thus received are sold at an unprocessed stage from the unit for domestic as well as export purpose. The duty is discharged on the unprocessed fabrics at the time of clearance from appellant's 'C' unit. At the time of receipt of the unprocessed fabrics at Unit A, excise duty already paid at Unit C is taken as Cenvat credit. This being so, the entire exercise is a revenue neutral situation and therefore the demand of duty is unjustified. He relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Jay Yuhshin Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi - 2000 (119) E.L.T. 718 (Tri. - LB). 3. The Learned AR Shri S. Govindarajan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He relied upon the decision....