COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. EWAC ALLOYS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE has filed this appeal against an order of Commissioner(Appeals) who had after going through material on record found as follows:

(2.) REVENUE is aggrieved, on the grounds, that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the fact that there is no flow back in the transaction interse between Larsen and Turbo Ltd. And the assessee and there is no allegation of recovery of additional consideration and reliance or Tribunal decision regarding related persons was not relevant and not applicable, Since Comparable price for same goods at the factory gate were available and the assessee captively consumed the Electrode and M/s. Larsen and Turbo has consumed the Electrode in their manufacture then such Electrode captively consumed by the assessee and M/s. Larsen and Turbo Ltd. and not sold to their customers is by including 2% service charges by applying the Rule 6(b)(i) of Valuation Rules 1975, thus 2% should be added.

(3.) WE find that when there is no charge collected of such 2%, for the Electrodes captively consumed by M/s. Larsen and Turbo and or the assessee then such charge cannot be added, moreover the class of buyers for electrodes consumed by M/s. Larsen and Turbo Ltd and electrodes sold in the capacity as distributor /dealer would be different and can have different prices under the erstwhile section to Valuation. We find no merits in the appeal filed by Revenue to upset the order of ld. Commissioner.