2023 (12) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, and imposition of penalty of like amount under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 by the original authority in relation to clearance of goods from their unit at Pimpri between April 2007 and March 2009 and April 2010 and March 2010 to their own factories at Urse and Goa. 2. The goods that attained 'semi-finished' form at their Pimpri factory were cleared to the other two units for utilization in manufacture of 'cables and wires' and, by recourse to rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 the appellant had been discharging duty liability under Central Excise Act, 1944 by adopting computation in certificate of cost accountant, based on CAS-4, o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ures and adjustment on account of inflation was done. They had adopted the above method of valuation since July 2000 when Valuation Rules, 2000 were introduced. As per chapter 6.8 of ICWAI guidelines, the cost of production can be determined on the basis of previous quarterly result also. The Appellants have appropriately taken cost figures of the previous month's CAS-4 certificates as a basis to arrive at the cost of production of each month. There was no objection whatsoever by the department at any point of time. For the first time in February 2008, during the course of audit for the period April 2006 to March 2007, this practice was objected and the Appellants were asked to redetermine cost of production on the basis of final annual....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by Section 11A or Section 11B, as the case may be. However, if the final orders passed under subrule (5) are appealed against - or questioned in a writ petition or suit, as the case may be, assuming that such a writ or suit is entertained and is allowed/decreed - then any refund claim arising as a consequence of the decision in such appeal or such other proceedings, as the case may be, would be governed by Section 11B. It is also made clear that if an independent refund claim is filed after the final decision under Rule 9B(5) reagitating the issues already decided under Rule 9B - assuming that such a refund claim lies - and is allowed, it would obviously be governed by Section 11B. It follows logically that position would be the same in the....