TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1278
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts (Chassis & Sheet Metal Parts), falling under Tariff Item No.8708 99 00 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The said motor vehicle parts manufactured by the appellants are stock transferred to their sister units located at Chakan (Pune), Ambad (Nashik), Hosur (Tamil Nadu) and Zaheerabad (Andhra Pradesh) for captive consumption in further manufacture and clearance of excisable goods to the automobile manufacturers. There is no sale of goods, in case of clearances effected to their sister units. Therefore, in respect of such clearances made to the sister units, valuation of goods is required to be determinedon the basis of cost of production, as prescribed by the Institute of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and the same was reflected in the supplementary invoices, issued by them to their other sister units. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned orders dated 29.03.2014, the appellants have preferred the appeals, being Nos. E/86798/2014 and E/86799/2014 before this Tribunal. 1.3 The supplementary invoices issued by H-25 unit and B-82/1 unit of the appellants as referred above, mentioning therein the differential Central Excise duty was availed as CENVAT credit by the sister units of the appellants viz., E-60, 61,62 and B-82/1. The credit so availed by those sister units on the basis of supplementary invoices were objected to by the department on the ground that such differential additional amount duty was paid by the other two units viz., H-25 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the end of September of the succeeding year, and the differential duty, if any, is accordingly calculated and paid in the succeeding years. It was further stated that in the case in hand, the books of accounts maintained by the appellants for the financial year 2011-2012 was finalized in September, 2012 and the appellants were in the process of determining the differential duty liability and were about to pay the same in the month of December, 2012, when the officers of the Preventive Section had visited their factory premises 16.12.2012. 4.1 It is an admitted fact on record that the appellants have themselves computed the differential duty liability and also paid the same along with interest, upon finalization of the books of accounts in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellants had suppressed any material particulars to the department or indulged into any malpractice, with an intent to evade payment of additional amount of Central Excise duty. Therefore, we are of the considered view that since, the manufacturing units (H-25 and B-82/1) had paid the additional amount of duty together with interest, immediately upon finalization of accounts, the penalty imposed on them under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be sustained inasmuch as there is no element of mens rea in delayed payment of the differential duty amount. 4.3 In view of the fact that issuance of supplementary invoices by the units in H-25 and B-82/1, are the prescribed documents under Rule 9 of the Rules of 2004, denial ....