TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 756
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IONER-03/15-16 dated 4th June 2015] of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-IV for recovery of Rs.25,61,41,120 of duties of central excise for the period from December 2007 to March 2014 under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, is before us for the second time with the grievance that, in the determination of liability this time, the scheme of verification directed by the Tribunal on the earlier occasion for ascertaining their contention of having discharged the duty liability, now sought to be recovered again, had been discarded after finalizing the modalities merely owing to successor-Commissioner being unwilling to carry that exercise to its logical conclusion. The second appeal impugns order [order-in-original no. PUN-EXCUS-004-COM....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the liability on the clearances to 'original equipment manufacturers (OEM)' are effected by M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd upon which is pegged the element of demand referred to supra on the finding that, notwithstanding the admitted receipt of dues with the exchequer, the obligation devolving on the appellant is not effaced. The other element, pertaining to 'automotive tubes' that eventually reach the 'replacement segment' dealers, had been crystallized on the alleged inability, or disinclination, on the part of the appellant to furnish documentary trail establishing discharge of differential duty, along with interest thereon, for the period of dispute. Thus it was that, for the period from December 2007 to November 2012, Rs. 11,65,29,065 and Rs. 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s no commercial contract can supplant the provisions of taxation statute. 5. As far as the supplies intended for 'replacement segment' market is concerned, Learned Senior Counsel informed that inclusion of discounts offered to the dealers, as well as applicable government levies, was cause of variation in value after clearance from the factory of the appellant and that, in all such instances, the applicable differential duty, along with interest thereon, had been discharged by the appellant for which documentation to support the reconciliation account, submitted to the adjudicating authority, was available with them. He also intimated that, at a time in the past, the facility of the appellant had been part and parcel of the operations of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce in this regard within a period of one month from today. Accordingly, we direct the appellant to lead evidence for payment of duty liability for this amount by M/s. Appollo Tyres Ltd. before the adjudicating authority. 5.3 As regards the differential duty demand of Rs. 10,10,80,372/- for which the appellant furnished reconciliation statement, it is necessary that the invoices for the sale of the goods need to be verified and the appellant should give details of these invoices along with sample copies so that the department can verify whether these discounts, claimed by the appellant at the time of removal of the goods, had indeed been passed on to the ultimate buyers by M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd. Since the period involved is 2006-07....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....conceding adequate time to enable the appellant to furnish the voluminous records of invoices and notes required for such reconciliation, proceeded to decide upon the matter by the impugned order which, in addition, also included demand for the succeeding period till March 2014 for ordering full recovery of Rs. 25,61,41,120. This, he informed, was followed by the second of the impugned orders for recovery of Rs. 78,67,077 for the period August to December 2014. 7. He further submitted that it was incorrect on the part of the adjudicating authority to deny the abatement of liability tied to the discount accorded to dealers in the 'replacement segment' market by M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd in its entirety; while admitting that there may have been....