2017 (3) TMI 1743

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... R. Subramaniyam, AC (AR) For the respondent ORDER Per: D.N. Panda, None present for the respondent. 2. Revenue has come in appeal. The matter is on the Board from 09.12.2016. On some pretext or other adjournment has been sought. Notices were sent to the respondent. In the absence of the respondent to pursue the appeal against it, Revenue is prejudiced. Therefore notice was issued to s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ory gate clearance only. 4. Law being codified to determine assessable value of the goods adopting price prevailed at the consignment depot, the assessable value ought to have been determined on that basis. Respondent was suppressing assessable value for payment of duty. Such situation was before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of the same respondent as reported in 2014 (306) EL....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inted out that penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, as the word suggest, is punishment for an act of deliberate deception by the assessee with the intent to evade duty by adopting any of the means mentioned in the Section. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that the duty was paid prior to issuance of show cause notice does not in any manner advance its case. The question t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....materials placed before him pointed out that as declared in the invoices that the removals specified in the notice are towards consignment agents, the responsibility of paying differential duty lies with the noticee. The Original Authority further pointed out that when the appellant was conscious of the notional value for sale towards consignment agent, the responsibility of paying differential du....