M/S. Symphony Comfort Systems Limited vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & S.T., ...

(Arising out of OIO-VAD-EXCUS-002-COM-087-13-14 dated 05.03.2014, Passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Service Tax & Customs, Vadodara)

M/s. Symphony Comfort Systems Limited : Appellant (s) M/s. Prince Containers Pvt. Limited

VERSUS

Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T., Vadodara : Respondent (s)

Represented by :

For Appellant (s) : Shri Uday Johsi and Shri S.R. Dixit, Advocates For Respondent (s) : Shri K. Sivakumar, Authorised Representative

For approval and signature :

Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. R.K. Singh, Hon'ble Member (Technical)

1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

Yes

CORAM :

Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. R.K. Singh, Hon'ble Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing / Decision : 03.02.2015

ORDER No. A/10150-10153/2015 Dated 03.02.2015

Per : Mr. P.K. Das;

Common issue is involved in these appeal and therefore, all are taken up together for disposal.

2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, we find that the M/s. Prince Containers Pvt. Limited (in short the Assessee are engaged in the manufacture of Air Coolers of Symphony Brand. The Assessee cleared the goods of Symphony Brand Air Coolers to M/s. Symphony Comfort Systems Limited (in short Symphony), on payment of duty on transaction value under Section 4(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. The adjudicating authority held that the Assessees are liable to pay duty under 10A of the Valuation Rules, 2000 and confirmed the demand of duty alongwith interest and penalty and also imposed penalties on M/s. Symphony.

3. We find that the issue is no more res-inegra in view of the decision of the Tribunal in the Assessees own case, for the earlier period, in the case of Ravikiran Plastics Pvt. Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara  2014 (303) ELT 144 (Tri. Ahmd.). The Tribunal set-aside the impugned order on the identical issue and allowed the appeals filed by the appellants. It has been held that transaction between the Assessee and M/s. Symphony are sales transaction, predominant supply of inputs or goods free of charge to Assessee not established. It is further held that initiations, monitoring and supervision of the manufacturing activities is purely a professional and commercial approach on the part of the brand owner to sustain his business, profitability and also to maintain the quality and timely supply of finished goods to the market to fulfil its sales commitments. It cannot be treated as job work under Rule 10A of the Valuation Rules.

4. In view of the above, following the Tribunals earlier decisions, impugned order is set-aside, all the appeals filed by the appellants are allowed.

(Dictated and pronounced in the Court)

(R.K. Singh) (P.K. Das) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial) ..KL

3