TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1626
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Notices (SCNs) which culminated into the present adjudication order. During the disputed period from March 2008 to January 2012, the appellants had sold cement to the independent buyers and also stock transferred the same to their Ready Mix Concrete (RMC) units for captive consumption, in order to manufacture of the final product i.e., RMC. For stock transferring the cement to their RMC units, the appellants had determined the assessable value in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 for discharging the Central Excise duty liability. However, the department had contended that the value of cement cleared to the RMC units should have been determined under Rule 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 4 of the Rules of 2000. On the basis of such understanding, show cause proceedings were initiated against all the units of the appellants for payment of the differential Central Excise duty. The SCNs issued to the appellants were commonly adjudicated vide the impugned order dated 31.03.2016 by the learned Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune, in confirming the proposals made therein. Feeling aggrieved with th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ods." 5. The effect of both the un-amended as well as the amended provisions under Rule 8 ibid were that for the period prior to 01.12.2013, the un-amended rule used to be applied, where the goods were not sold, but were used entirely, for consumption by the manufacturer, or on his behalf, in the manufacture of other articles. However, the position w.e.f. 01.12.2013, under the amended Rule 8 was different, providing that the captive consumption of goods would also fall under the ambit of the said rule, even if, a part of the excisable goods is sold to the independent buyer(s). In other words, the distinctive features, as a result of such amendment in the statute, were that for the period prior to 01.12.2013, the entire excisable goods were required to be used for captive consumption, for manufacture of the other articles; and that, for the period after 01.12.2013, the manufacturer was permitted to sell a part of the manufactured excisable goods and to use the remaining part, for captive consumption, in order to manufacture the further excisable goods. 6. The appellants have claimed that their case is governed under the amended provisions of Rule 8 ibid, since the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Section 4(1)(b) ibid. For the purpose of the said sub-section, the Valuation Rules, 2000 were framed. The provisions for captive consumption of goods are dealt with in Rule 8 ibid. 7.2 On reading of the amended provisions contained in Section 4 ibid, it would transpire that the concept of 'transaction value' was brought into the statute book, with the objective and purpose of accepting different transaction values for each and every transaction, which may be charged by an assessee to different customers, for assessment purposes. As per the said amended provisions, so long as the transactions are based upon purely commercial consideration, where buyer and the seller have no relationship with each other, and price is the sole consideration for sale, the transaction would fall under the purview of Section 4(1)(a) ibid, for consideration as transaction value for the purpose of duty assessment. 7.3 Deriving the concept of transaction value contained in Section 4 ibid, the appellants had determined the value, at which clinkers would be removed from the factory to the independent buyers and such value declared by the appellants was also accepted by the department as t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Court Cases 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that substitution of legal provision will have retrospective effect, as it repeals the old rule and brings into existence the new rule in its place. The relevant paragraphs in the said judgement are extracted herein below: "23. The text of Section 2 of the Second Amendment Act provides for the word "upto" being substituted for the word "after". What is the meaning and effect of the expression employed therein - "shall be substituted"? 24. The substitution of one text for the other pre-existing text is one of the known and well-recognised practices employed in legislative drafting. 'Substitution' has to be distinguished from 'supersession' or a mere repeal of an existing provision. 25. Substitution of a provision results in repeal of the earlier provision and its replacement by the new provision (See Principles of Statutory Interpretation, ibid, p. 565). If any authority is needed in support of the proposition, it is to be found in West U.P. Sugar Mills Assn. v. State of Rajasthan v. MangilalPindwal, Koteswar U.P., State Vittal of Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga and Co. and A.L.V.R.S.T. Veerappa Chettiar v.....