- (1.) THE Respondent -Assessee is engaged in the manufacture of non -woven carpets which fall under Chapter sub -Heading 5703.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Main customer of the Respondent was M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited, Gurgaon, (hereinafter referred to as M/s. Maruti) to whom the Assessee had been supplying these non -woven carpets. The aforesaid product is exigible to excise duty and the Assessee was clearing the product on the payment of excise duty as per the invoices raised on sale of this product to M/s. Maruti. It so transpired that the Assessee received additional amount on account of price escalation during the period 1996 -1997 to 2000 -2001. However, this was not intimated to the Department nor any duty paid on the same. On coming to know of the aforesaid fact, the Department issued summons to the Director of the Assessee to appear before the authorities and explain the nature of the aforesaid additional amount by way of price escalation received by the Assessee. In spite of repeated summons followed by reminders, nobody appeared on behalf of the Assessee. In these circumstances, the Department inquired from M/s. Maruti to furnish the details of additional amount paid to the Respondent -Assessee on account of price escalation. As per M/s. Maruti, a sum of Rs. 55,48,971.75/ - was paid to the Assessee during the period from 1996 -1997 to 2000 -2001 under the aforesaid Heading. It has resulted in the issuance of Show Cause Notice dated 4 -1 -2002 by the Adjudicating Authority, viz., Additional Commissioner of Central Excise (Anti Evasion), Delhi -Ill to the Assessee Under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and proviso to this provision was also invoked to avail the extended period of limitation. No reply was filed and in these circumstances, the demand contained in the Show Cause Notice in the sum of Rs. 13,73,048/ - was confirmed. A penalty of an equal amount on the Assessee -company and personal penalty of Rs. 3 lakhs on the Director of the Assessee -company was also imposed.
(2.) THE Assessee challenged the aforesaid order before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'CESTAT') contending that as per the provision of Section 11A of the Act, the ex -factory price at the time when the goods were cleared would be the transaction value and therefore, excise duty was rightly paid. In other words, what was contended was that the escalation price which was received subsequently could not be taken into consideration. The CESTAT has accepted the aforesaid plea of the Assessee and in the process relied upon the judgment of this Court in 'MRF Limited v. CCE, Madras : 1997 (92) E.L.T. 309 (S.C.). Against this order of the CESTAT, the present appeal is preferred. Though the notice of this appeal is duly served upon the Respondent, nobody has put in any appearance on behalf of the Respondent.
(3.) IN these circumstances, we have heard Mr. A.K. Sanghi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revenue, and have gone through the records.;