SILVASA MACHINES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VAPI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against Order -in -Original No. 21 -22/DEM/Vapi/2006, dated 31 -8 -2006.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant herein is engaged in the manufacture of textile machines and textile machine parts, availing Cenvat credit of the Central Excise duty paid on the inputs received for manufacture of textile machines and textile machine parts. The appellant is having units in different places for manufacturing of very same product. The appellant has cleared the inputs which was received as such, to his own units/sister concerns during the period in question in this appeal i.e. July 2000 to February 2003, by reversing the Cenvat credit availed by them of the Excise duty paid on such inputs. The Department was of the view that the appellant should have recalculated the assessable value in accordance with the provisions of Central Excise Valuation Rules 8 and 9 and should have paid 115% of the amount of such recalculated value and discharged the duty liability. Show Cause Notices were issued for demand of such differential duty. Adjudicating authority did not find any force in the contentions raised by the appellant before him and confirmed the demand of duty, interest thereof and imposed penalty.

(3.) LD . Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the appellant had undisputedly reversed the Cenvat credit availed on the inputs while clearing the same to their sister concerns. It is his submission that there cannot be any re -assessment of the said goods as inputs were undisputedly removed as such. He would rely upon the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Tractors v. C.C.E., Jaipur - 2005 (189) E.L.T. 131 (Tri. -LB). He would take us through the provisions Rule 57AB and Rule 3 and also the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2002.