Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Nsp Electronics Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise ... on 2 February, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
BANGALORE
Appeal(s) Involved:
E/703/2007-DB
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 149-2007 dated 27/08/2007 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore ]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SMT ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK K. ARYA, TECHNICAL MEMBER
1
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
NSP ELECTRONICS LTD
NO.52/1, 52/2, 52/3, 53/1, VIRGONAGAR INDUSTRIAL AREA, VEERANAHALLI VILLAGE, BANGALORE
Appellant(s)
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise ,Customs and Service Tax BANGALORE-I
POST BOX NO 5400...CR BUILDINGS,
BANGALORE, - 560001
KARNATAKA
Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. B.N GURURAJ, Adv 22.2, 3 RD MAIN ROAD CHAMARAJ PET, BANGALORE , -
KARNATAKA For the Appellant Mr. MOHAMMAD YUSUF, A.R. For the Respondent Date of Hearing: 02/02/2016 Date of Decision: 02/02/2016 CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK K. ARYA, TECHNICAL MEMBER Final Order No. 20198 / 2016 Per : ARCHANA WADHWA Learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that they are engaged in the manufacture of Printed Circuit Boards against purchase orders placed upon them by M/s Priyraj Electronics Ltd., and M/s United Telecom. Revenue by entertaining a view that their customers are related parties on account of some of the Directors being common, invoked provisions of Rule 8 for the purpose of valuation of the product. He submits that he is not contesting on this issue but the assessable value may be arrived at on the basis of CAS-4 formula. He submits that there were earlier proceedings and the Tribunal in their own case vide Final Order No. 25465-25467/2013 dated 20.06.2013 had remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority with a direction to adopt the valuation in terms of CAS-4 certificate. Both sides pray for adopting the same Rule.
2. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for fresh decision in the light of the directions contained in the earlier order referred (supra). Appeal disposed of in above terms. (Order pronounced in open court) ASHOK K. ARYA TECHNICAL MEMBER ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER pnr 2