PARRY CONFECTIONERY LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are aggrieved with the confirmation of duty in terms of Order -in -original No. 30/2003, dated 30 -6 -2003. The appellants are manufacturer of sugar boiled confectioneries, Printed PVC wrapper, BOPP films, Printed Cellophane etc. They were getting the printing and wrapping materials from their job workers and captively consuming the same. The department scrutinized the cost construction arrived at the prices of these materials and felt that the cost of ink had not been added in the cost of the raw materials. Hence proceedings were initiated in terms of Rule 6 (b) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 to add the cost of ink in the assessable value of the raw materials manufactured by the job workers. The appellants contested the case and produced the certificate from the Chartered Accountant who had verified the records of the job workers and clearly certified that the factory charges paid to the sub -contractor include the cost of ink, wages, salaries, their overheads and profit margin. The partner of the said job workers had also furnished an affidavit to the department in support of their Chartered Accountant's certificate. However, the Commissioner in the impugned order, has not accepted the evidence on the ground that the split up value of the ink cost has not been furnished and it is not substantiated. The affidavits have also disbelieved on the ground that the stamp paper was issued on 31 -8 -02 while the affidavit has been deposed on 16th August, 2002 in respect of one of the affidavits.

(2.) WE have heard ld. Senior Counsel Shri V, Chandrasekaran for the appellants and ld. SDR Smt. R. Bhagya Devi, SDR for the Revenue. We have perused the entire records and the evidence produced by the assessee before the authorities. After a careful consideration we are of the opinion that the matter is required to go back to the original authority for de novo consideration. The Chartered Accountant's certificate is explicit and clear that the conversion charges paid to the sub -contractor includes the cost of ink, wages, salaries, their overheads and profit margin paid to the sub -contactor. This certificate has been issued after due verification of all the records of the sub -contractors and the appellants. The Commissioner wanted the split up value of the amount but no show cause notice was issued to the appellants asking them to furnish the same. It is a case of simple verification which could have been done on calling upon the appellants to produce further details. One of the affidavits was rejected simply on the ground that the deposed date is before the date of the issue of the stamp paper. The sub -contractors are willing to furnish further affidavits and to produce all the documents in their custody to show that the cost of the ink has been added in the value of the raw materials i.e. wrapper papers. The evidence has to be re -scrutinized and the contention of the assessee has to be re -examined in the light of the documents produced by them for examination before the original authority. The original authority shall offer a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants to produce and substantiate the details furnished in the Chartered Accountant's certificate and the affidavits. The de novo proceedings shall be completed within six months from the dale of this order. At this stage ld. Sr. Counsel submits that they have also taken the ground of time bar which is also required to be considered in the de novo proceedings. We direct the Commissioner to examine all the grounds taken by the appellants in the de novo consideration. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.