TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 65
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Appellant Company in terms of Rule, 7 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 read with Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with an order for its recovery made by the Additional Commissioner of Central GST, Kolhapur that got affirmed by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I) Pune, by way of rejection of the appeal preferred by the Assessee-Appellant before him, has brought the dispute to the present forum. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, is that Appellant manufactures 'Yeast' and clears the same from its factory gate as well as from depots upon payment of applicable excise duty. Department's case is that Appellant had adopted incorrect valuation for goods cleared to its depo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TAT that Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 would govern the field and not Section 4A. While challenging the invocation of extended period after Appellant was being subjected to special Audit under 14A and Seventeen numbers of other Audits for the period under dispute, he further submitted that department had parallelly pursued its demand by issuing two show-cause notices for the same period which is contrary to the observation made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Osaka Alloys And Steels Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2007 (211) ELT 543 (P & H) and in Lupin Ltd. judgment reported in 2013 (293) ELT 354 passed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, for which the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to be set aside. 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... factory Interestingly also it is to be noticed that after adjudication order in respect of first show-cause notice was issued that had attained finality by dropping the demand by the CESTAT on 11.01.2018, the other show-cause notice was pursued and adjudication order was passed subsequent thereto. It seems that ignoring all legal provisions including the constitutional right of protection against double jeopardy that is being tried repeatedly for the same act of alleged omission despite a clear finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in Osaka Alloys And Steels Pvt. Ltd. cited supra that even without adjudication of the first show-cause notice, issue of second show-cause notice raising the demand is without jurisdiction, besides being....