2024 (6) TMI 1006

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appellant is a manufacturer of Engine parts and Aluminum raw castings for automobile sector falling under Chapter heading 84099191 and 76169910 of Schedule I to Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 on which they are availing CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. The appellant received Catalyst (hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned goods') from their customer and Principal Manufacturer M/s Hyundai Motors India Ltd., (hereinafter referred as M/s HMIL) for the manufacture of components viz., Manifold Catalystic Assy Exhaust, on job work basis, by using the impugned goods and cleared them to M/s HMIL on payment of duty. The appellant has availed Cenvat credit of the duty paid by M/s HMIL. M/s HMIL had not paid the VAT at 4....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to 31.12.2012 prompting issuance of a Show Cause Notice No.12/2013 dated 2.5.2013 . For the subsequent period from 01.01.13 to 30.11.13 another notice on the same issue vide Statement of Demand No.4/2014 dated 20.01.2014, for an amount of Rs.6,04,836/- (Basic Education Duty Rs.5,86,691/- + Education Cess Rs.12,097/- + Secondary Higher Education Cess Rs.6,048/-). 5. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand, interest and imposed penalty. Aggrieved by such order the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 6. The Ld. Counsel Shri. M.N. Bharathi, appeared and argued for the appellant. Ld. AR Shri. Harendra Singh Pal, appeared and argued for the department. 7. We have heard the rival parties and carefully perus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ads 2010 (252) ELT 79, there is no provision to include notional duties which have not been paid on the inputs. The department is aware of the issue as early in May 2010 vide Superintendent's letter dated 13-05-2010. The demand is hit by time-bar as the demand for the period April 2008 to December 2012 had been raised after one year from the date of filing of Monthly return in spite of instructions in Board Circular No.887/7/2009-CX dated 11-05-2009. Payment of interest and imposition of penalty also may not arise. The appellant also placed reliance on the Supreme Court's judgement in General Engineering Works Vs CCE, Jaipur [2007(212) ELT 295 (SC)], (although a copy of the same was not made available), and Collector of Central Excise P....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....c CAS standard (CAS-4 etc) of ICAI but refers to the Cost Accounting Standard on cost of production for captive consumption without explaining why it is applicable to transaction between independent persons. 11. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the Appellants own case vide Order-in-Appeal No 28/2017(CXA-II) dated 30/01/2017 has cited the CBEC's Manual of Supplementary Instructions 2005, Under Part III, regarding 'Valuation' to the effect that, the definition of transaction value mentions that whatever amount is actually paid or actually payable to the Government or the relevant statutory authority by way of excise, sales tax and other taxes, shall be excluded from the transaction value. Further it noted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in Collec....