TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 5
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DER Per : P A Augustian The issue in the present appeals is whether the valuation of goods sold by the appellant from their depot during the period from 01.04.2004 to 31.12.2012 is covered under Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. 2. The brief facts are the appellants are manufacturing plastic water storage tanks and selling 90% of their production at the factory gate to independent buyers and were paying duty on such transaction value. As regards the balance quantity, they transferred the same to their depot in Tamil Nadu on which they were paying duty on the basis of the price charged to independent buyers at the factory gate. However, Audit objected to the method of valuation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Authority confirmed the demand and aggrieved by the said orders, appeals were filed before Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-In-Appeal dated 12.03.2018 upheld the Order-In-Original, however for the first period restricted the demands for normal period and also set aside the penalty under Section 11AC. Further for the period 01.01.2013 to 31.12.2013 Show Cause Notice dated 27.012.2014 was issued and the adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand vide order-in-original dated 15.01.2015 and on appeal Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 12.03.2018 has upheld the order-in-original. Aggrieved by all the above 8(eight) impugned orders present appeals are filed before the Tribunal. 4. As the issue involve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... considered the issue in the matter of ISPAT INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C.EX. RAIGAD - 2007 (2) TMI 5 - CESTAT, MUMBAI-LB and it is held that; "5. We have considered the rival submissions and are of the view that the assessee is correct in contending that provisions of Rule 8 would apply only in a case where its entire production of a particular commodity is captively consumed. This is evident on a plain reading of Rule 8 of the valuation rules, which reads as under "Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used for consumption by him or on his behalf in the production or manufacture of other articles, the value shall be one hundred and ten per cent of the cost of production or manufacture of such goods" ( emph....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessed to duty. Since the assessee in the present case is the Dolvi plant and it is not the revenue's case that the other three units of the company to whom HR coils were transferred were undertaking further manufacturing operations on behalf of the Dolvi Unit, the provisions of Rule 8 will not apply. We, therefore, hold that Rule 8 is inapplicable in the instant case." 8. Learned Consultant further submits that the very same issue was also considered by the Tribunal in the matter of M/s. Jai Balaji Industries Ltd Vs. Commissioner of C.EX., Bolpur - 2021 (12) TMI 358 - CESTAT, KOLKATA "21. This decision of the Larger Bench was relied upon by the Tribunal in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (supra) to hold that Rule 7 of ....