Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.30 seconds)
Wheel And Axle Plant vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 4 August, 2003 cites

Cce vs Ballarpur Industries Ltd. on 3 April, 2000

(a) The reliance of the ld. Advocate for the appellants on the case of Ballarpur Industries ltd. v. CCE [2001 (138) E.L.T. 94 (T)] and in the case of CCE v. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. [2001 (137) E.L.T. 164 (T)] is well-founded. In absence of any contrary decisions shown to us, we agree, that, there is force in the submissions being made that shifting of the goods to another unit of the assessee for captive consumption, as in this case, to the Zonal Railways of Indian Railways System, from the premises owned by Indian Railways, where wheels and other entities emerged for captive consumption and use in the Railway Bogies, Engines etc., for manufacture etc., there is no sale involved. Since the appellant and the Zonal Railways, both constitute and are the same legal entity i.e. Indian Railways. Hence, following the case law, cited, based on Supreme Court decisions, Modvat credit as availed, was not required to be reversed under Rule 57CC since no sale price of the goods removed for use in the Indian Railways system i.e for captive consumption of Indian Railways, is not available in this case. We are reinforced in coming to such a finding, that there was no sale price available, since the Commissioner in the impugned order itself is determining the valuation, of the removals effected to Indian Railways, under Rule 6(b)(i) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, for the purposes of determining liability under erstwhile Rule 57CC and Rule 57AD. Rule 6(b)(i) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, is applicable, if the value of the excisable goods under assessment cannot be determined under Rule 4 or 5. Rules 4 and 5 of these Rules prescribe valuation to be based on the value of such goods sold by the assessee, for delivery at any other time nearest to the time of removal or when price was not the sole consideration for such sale effected. In the present case, when it is found that no sales are being effected, we cannot determine valuation under 6(b)(i) without ruling out Rule 4 and 5. Thus, the valuations as directed by the Commissioner cannot be upheld. Once the sale value as arrived at and directed, cannot upheld, the sale price cannot be determined, once sale price cannot be determined, 8% of the amount, as required, cannot be determined under Rule 57CC.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 1 - Cited by 21 - Full Document
1