2025-VIL-2189-CESTAT-BLR-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Valuation of Excisable Goods, Amortized Value of Moulds, Job Work, Transaction Value, Section 4(1)(b) of Central Excise Act, 1944, Rule 6 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 - The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of parts and accessories of vehicles and during the course of an audit, it was observed that the appellant was supplied free of cost moulds by its customers (OEMs) to manufacture the goods. The adjudicating authority re-determined the assessable value of the goods by including the value of the moulds, excluding duty, to be amortized in terms of Section 4(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. The appellant contended that the inter-unit movement of goods was done by paying 110% of the cost of production as per Section 8 of the Valuation Rules, and that the moulds belonged to the OEMs who supplied them under job work challans - Whether the value of the moulds supplied free of cost by the OEMs should be included in the assessable value of the goods cleared by the appellant - HELD - The Tribunal, following its own previous decision in the appellant's case and the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of International Auto Limited vs Commissioner of Central Excise, held that the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment is squarely applicable to the present case - Since the moulds were supplied by the OEMs under job work challans and their value was amortized by the OEMs while clearing the final product, the appellant could not be asked to include the value of such moulds in its assessable value - The impugned orders confirming the demand were unsustainable and accordingly set aside the orders - The appeals are allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page