2020 (1) TMI 312

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri S. J. Vyas, Advocate for the Appellant Shri. Sanjiv Kinker, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of the Cotton Yarn and supply to the interrelated units / theirs group companies. They were valuing their goods on cost construction method. Since at the time of the removal the cost of man....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... payable from the due date with reference to the date of removal of the goods. However, his submission is only on limitation. He submits that the appellant has disclosed their modus operandi of valuation of the goods vide letter dated 14 July, 2006. According to the said letter the appellants were paying duty by applying due date and since the value was not ascertained at the time of removal of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nee was entitled for the Cenvat Credit hence the situation is revenue neutral, for these reasons also the extended period cannot be invoked. 3. Shri Sanjiv Kinker, Learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned orders. 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. As regards the merits of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... above method. It is also observed that the supply of the goods is to their own division who are entitled for the Cenvat Credit. Therefore, due to Revenue neutral situation extended period could not have been invoked. With these facts there is no suppression of facts and mala fide on the part of the appellants. Accordingly the demand for extended period is not sustainable, as a result appeal No. E....