TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 832
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng aggrieved by order dated 18/05/2018 passed in Excise Appeal No.E/50287/2017. 05-The facts of the case reveal that M/s. Bhagirath Coach and Metals Fabricators Pvt. Ltd., a Company engaged in the manufacture of Motor Vehicle for transport of goods, body of motor vehicles, which attracts Central Excise Duty as per Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant is a job worker for M/s. Volvo Eicher Commercial Vehicles Ltd. 06-Undisputedly, M/s. Volvo Eicher Commercial Vehicles Ltd. was supplying chassis and other material to M/s. Bhagirath Coach and Metals Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. (assessee) to assessee and the assessee availed CENVAT credit of duty paid on chassis and other raw materials recovered from Volvo. During the period of dispute, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Rule 7 reads as under:- "RULE 7. Provisional assessment.- 1) Where the assessee is unable to determine the value of excisable goods or determine the rate of duty applicable thereto, he may request the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, in writing giving reasons for payment of duty on provisional basis and the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, may order allowing payment of duty on provisional basis at such rate or on such value as may be specified by him. (2) The payment of duty on provisional basis may be allowed, if the assessee executes a bond in the form prescribed by notification by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such amount is determined, till the date of payment thereof. [(5) Where the assessee is entitled to a refund consequent to order for final assessment under sub-rule (3), subject to sub-rule (6), there shall be paid an interest on such refund at the rate specified by the Central Government by notification issued under section 11BB of the Act] (6) Any amount of refund determined under sub-rule (3) shall be credited to the Fund: Provided that the amount of refund, instead of being credited to the Fund, be paid to the applicant, if such amount is relatable to- (a) the duty of excise paid by the manufacturer, if he had not passed on the incidence of such duty to any other person; or (b)the duty of excise borne by the buyer, if he had n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visions of foregoing rules, wherever applicable, shall mutatis mutandis apply for determination of the value of the excisable goods : Provided that the cost of transportation, if any, from the premises, wherefrom the goods are sold, to the place of delivery shall not be included in the value of excisable goods. Explanation. - For the purposes of this rule, job-worker means a person engaged in the manufacture or production of goods on behalf of a principal manufacturer, from any inputs or goods supplied by the said principal manufacturer or by any other person authorised by him." 11-The Division Bench of this Court in Central Excise Appeal No.13/2019 has dealt with similar controversy involved in the matter and has arrived at a conclusi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder:- "9. It is urged that the assessee had determined the cost of production on monthly basis by taking budgeted conversion cost which was derived at by taking actual cost of raw material and packing material. Whereas, as per guidelines issued by CBEC vide Circular No.692/08/2003-CX-I dated 13.2.2003 he is required to determine the cost of production in terms of CAS-4 issued by ICA1 for the purpose of Rule 8, which rendered the monthly method of determination of cost of production redundant. It is urged that the practice adopted for payment of duty by the assessee of determining annual cost of production in terms of CAS-4 Certificate prepared at the end of year and then pay the differential excise duty after adjusting the excess payment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch adjustment." 12. The decisions relied by the appellant in M/s Mahindra Ungine Steel Co. Ltd. V/s CCE Pune, 2012 (278)ELT 215 (Tri. Mumbai) are of no assistance, because in these cases there was no evidence on record that the incidence of duty is not passed. In the present case it is an inter unit transfer of SSFA Noodles. Similarly in Krishna Electrical Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C.Ex., Indore, 2017 (352) E.L.T. 67 was not a case as the present one wherein the adjustment is made within same financial year. 13. In view whereof we are of the considered opinion that the substantial questions of law as proposed does not arise in the given facts of the case. 14. Consequently, appeal fails and is dismissed. No costs." The controversy....