Shri Krsna Urja Project Pvt Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that there was no legal basis for adopting cost inflation index of Income Tax dept for determination of assessable value under Section 4 of CE Act read with the CE Valuation Rules, 2000, for valuation of captively consumed goods. The Tribunal also noted that cost of manufacture as certified by Cost Accountant in CAS-4 cannot be rejected based on vague reasons and that Commissioner (Appeals) should have provided tenable grounds for rejecting assessable value.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT JUDGEMENT
The brief facts of the matter are that the appellant is engaged in manufacture of end use car carrier falling under Central Excise Tariff Heading 87 during the financial year 2008-09 and 2009-2010. The appellant have manufactured 25 car carriers for their captive use for transportation of the cars, which are not sold by them. The appellant have paid Central Excise duty on such car carriers as per the provisions of Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2004 on the basis of value provided by Cost Accountant as per the requirement of CAS 4 certificate. The Revenue has undertaken Audit of the appellant’s manufacturing premise for the period covering April 2008 to November, 2010. The Revenue has entertained a doubt with regard to the valuation adopted by the appellant for payment of Central Excise duty. It has been contended by the Revenue that the cost of manufactured car carriers given by the Cost Accountant in their CAS 4 certificate is less than the value adopted by the Revenue for the previous period i.e. 2004-2005 to 2007-2008, for which the show cause notice was issued earlier and adjudicated by the competent authority.
2. The assessee had shown total cost of production of car carriers in CAS 4 for the years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 as under:
