P.M. TELELINKS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE stay application and the appeal are taken up together for the disposal as the matter is required to be remanded for de novo consideration. The Commissioner (Appeals) by Order -in -Appeal No. 126/2005 (H -I) CE dated 24.11.2005 dismissed the appeal in terms of provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, for non -depositing of Rs. 7,50,000/ -. The appellants were clearing HR Strips to their Sister unit. Both were registered units. The second unit was to avail the Cenvat credit on the duty that would be paid by the first unit which cleared the goods. The assessable value has not been accepted by the Original authority on the ground that they are required to value at 115% of the cost of production. This has been contested by the appellants on the ground that they had properly valued the goods. They have also taken a stand that all the details were known to the Department. Therefore, the demands are barred by time. Both the grounds have not been accepted by the Original authority.

(2.) THE Manager of the appellant's Company submits that this Bench in the case of Kores (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad [2004 (178) ELT 901 (Tri. - Bang.)] has taken a view that where there is revenue neutrality, then the question of invoking larger period does not arise as there is no intention to evade payment of duty. Similar view has been taken in the case of MRF Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad . The Representative submits that the appellant is faced with severe financial hardship as the Company is closed and is before the BFR. He submits that on this ground, waiver of pre -deposit of the amount is required to be granted and the matter be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the case on merits.

(3.) HEARD the learned SDR in the matter.