Guest Article: No Service tax on free Pick-up/Home delivery of food, being ‘Sale’ in nature & E-Commerce Model under Delhi VAT [see 'Notes & News'] | Goa Value Added Tax (Tenth Amendment) Rules, 2015 | Maharashtra: Exemption to drugs for the treatment of Cancer | Bihar Settlement of Taxation Disputes Act, 2015 | Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax (Amendment) Act, 2015 | West Bengal: Extension of the last date of filing VAT Return | Delhi Circular: Input Tax Credit - Furnishing additional security | Haryana Value Added Tax (Second Amendment) Rules, 2015 | Chandigarh: Amendment in Schedule 'E' - Change in rate of tax on Batteries & Mobile Phone/Cell Phone |

Recent Updates

2015-VIL-360-MAD|VAT |High Court Cases | 28.08.2015

... Joint Commissioner, LTU to admit the revision petition filed under Section 54 of the Act – Input Tax credit on the sale goods under Schedule I & II – HELD - The present writ petition is in respect of the assessment period from April 2014 to October 2014, covered by the provisional assessment of the year 2014-15. Originally the petitioner filed an appeal along with pre-deposit in time. The second respondent ought to have taken into account the said fact that the appellate jurisdiction was in time invoked. Similarly, the 3rd respondent also failed to consider the fact that the petitioner with bonafide belief deposited 25% of... [Read more]

... Joint Commissioner, LTU to admit the revision petition filed under Section 54 of the Act – Input Tax credit on the sale goods under Schedule I & II – HELD - The present writ petition is in respect of the assessment period from April 2014 to October 2014, covered by the provisional assessment of the year 2014-15. Originally the petitioner filed an appeal along with pre-deposit in time. The second respondent ought to have taken into account the said fact that the appellate jurisdiction was in time invoked. Similarly, the 3rd respondent also failed to consider the fact that the petitioner with bonafide belief deposited 25% of the disputed tax, which is not mandatory when the revision is an appropriate remedy. Hence, there is no justifiable reason for the 3rd respondent to reject the revision petition - the impugned orders are set aside and the revision petition filed by the petitioner along with the stay application be entertained by the revisional authority - pending consideration of the stay application by the revisional authority, there shall not be any recovery proceedings against the petitioner – Petition allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-359-DEL-ST|SERVICE TAX |High Court Cases | 28.08.2015

... r of the pre-deposit and stay of further proceedings - Demand of service tax - Agreement between HPCL and Indraprastha Gas Ltd. (‘IGL’) for distribution of Compressed Natural Gas (‘CNG’) through the HPCL owned/leased retail outlet – Whether the activity amounts to providing Business Auxiliary Services – HELD – Coordinate Bench of the CESTAT while interpreting identical clauses of a similar agreement involving HPCL itself came to the conclusion that HPCL was not providing Business Auxiliary Services to MGL in carrying on the same activity, that final judgment itself constituted a prima facie case in favour of HPCL - If the ... [Read more]

... r of the pre-deposit and stay of further proceedings - Demand of service tax - Agreement between HPCL and Indraprastha Gas Ltd. (‘IGL’) for distribution of Compressed Natural Gas (‘CNG’) through the HPCL owned/leased retail outlet – Whether the activity amounts to providing Business Auxiliary Services – HELD – Coordinate Bench of the CESTAT while interpreting identical clauses of a similar agreement involving HPCL itself came to the conclusion that HPCL was not providing Business Auxiliary Services to MGL in carrying on the same activity, that final judgment itself constituted a prima facie case in favour of HPCL - If the Principal Bench of the CESTAT felt that the agreement between HPCL and IGL, identical to the agreement between HPCL and MGL, called for a different interpretation, and that therefore the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the same strength in BPCL v. CST, Mumbai required reconsideration, then the appropriate course for the Principal Bench, CESTAT was to refer the matter to a larger Bench of the CESTAT - In any event, at the stage of considering an application for stay, the CESTAT, Principal Bench ought to have proceeded on the basis that in light of the final judgment in BPCL v. CST, Mumbai being favour of HPCL, it had a prima facie case - The issue is pending consideration in the Supreme Court - the Court is of the view that the CESTAT was not justified in declining to grant an unconditional stay in favour of the Appellant, without requiring the making of any pre-deposit - the impugned order of CESTAT is hereby set aside. There shall, during the pendency of the appeal, be an unconditional stay of the order passed by the CCE, Delhi-III, which is under challenge in the said appeal – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-358-MAD-ST|SERVICE TAX |High Court Cases | 28.08.2015

... he Cenvat Credit for payment of service tax on Goods Transport Agency services – Input / Output service – Circular 345/4/2005-TRN dated 3.10.2005 - HELD - While Rule 2(l) and 2(p) cover two classes of persons, the recipient of GTA services, by virtue of the Explanation to Rule 2(p) of the CCR, as a provider of output service, is entitled to all benefits that a person providing input service would be entitled to in the matter of Cenvat credit adjustment. Thus, a reading of Rule 2(l) and 2(p) would show that they cover two different situations and though their operations are totally different, yet, for the purpose of giving ... [Read more]

... he Cenvat Credit for payment of service tax on Goods Transport Agency services – Input / Output service – Circular 345/4/2005-TRN dated 3.10.2005 - HELD - While Rule 2(l) and 2(p) cover two classes of persons, the recipient of GTA services, by virtue of the Explanation to Rule 2(p) of the CCR, as a provider of output service, is entitled to all benefits that a person providing input service would be entitled to in the matter of Cenvat credit adjustment. Thus, a reading of Rule 2(l) and 2(p) would show that they cover two different situations and though their operations are totally different, yet, for the purpose of giving credit to the Service Tax payable from the Cenvat credit available, the recipient is also entitled to the same relief as a provider of the service – Following the ruling in case of Cheran Spinners Ltd decided in favour of assessee [Read less]

2015-VIL-455-CESTAT-DEL-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 28.08.2015

... o units by one unit - Appellant is having two units (Gurgaon & Manesar), it availed certain input services which are common for both the units and availed entire Cenvat Credit in Gurgaon unit - The Revenue contention that as certain input services pertains to Manesar unit, therefore, appellant are not entitled to take entire Cenvat Credit on these common input services – Denial Cenvat Credit to Gurgaon unit on the ground that the capital goods were not being transferred to Gurgaon unit on merger of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. with Maruti Udyog Ltd – HELD - There was no restriction for utilization of such credit without alloca... [Read more]

... o units by one unit - Appellant is having two units (Gurgaon & Manesar), it availed certain input services which are common for both the units and availed entire Cenvat Credit in Gurgaon unit - The Revenue contention that as certain input services pertains to Manesar unit, therefore, appellant are not entitled to take entire Cenvat Credit on these common input services – Denial Cenvat Credit to Gurgaon unit on the ground that the capital goods were not being transferred to Gurgaon unit on merger of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. with Maruti Udyog Ltd – HELD - There was no restriction for utilization of such credit without allocating proportionately to various units - there is no ban on availment of Cenvat Credit of one unit if input service pertains to both the units prior to 2012 - Appellant is not required to reverse Cenvat Credit – Cenvat Credit on account of merger of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. with Maruti Udyog Ltd - Since, both the units have been merged, therefore, appellant is entitled to transfer Cenvat Credit lying unutilized in the Cenvat Credit account of the unit merged with the main unit. Therefore, appellant is entitled to take Cenvat Credit in terms of Rule 10 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 – No merit in impugned order, same is set aside – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-454-CESTAT-DEL-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 28.08.2015

... credit of Education cess and Secondary & Higher Education cess when inputs are supplied by 100% EOU, paying duty under Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated 31.3.2003 – HEDL - As per proviso to Section 3(1) of CEA, 1944, if the goods are manufactured by an EOU and brought to any place in India, the excise duty levied shall be equal to the aggregate of the duties of customs which would be leviable under the Customs Act, 1962 on like goods produced or manufactured outside India if imported to India - Thus this Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) includes within it, Education Cess and SHE cess - When goods have been removed from EO... [Read more]

... credit of Education cess and Secondary & Higher Education cess when inputs are supplied by 100% EOU, paying duty under Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated 31.3.2003 – HEDL - As per proviso to Section 3(1) of CEA, 1944, if the goods are manufactured by an EOU and brought to any place in India, the excise duty levied shall be equal to the aggregate of the duties of customs which would be leviable under the Customs Act, 1962 on like goods produced or manufactured outside India if imported to India - Thus this Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) includes within it, Education Cess and SHE cess - When goods have been removed from EOU to DTA, availing the exemption under Sr. No. 2 of Notification No. 23/2003 there is a restriction carved out by the formula provided in the proviso to Rule 3(7)(a). This restriction is to prohibit taking credit on the BCD component. But credit is available on the Additional Customs duty (CVD) component. As already stated, Additional Customs duty includes excise duty as well as cess on this excise duty. Therefore the respondents are entitled to take credit of an amount equivalent to the Additional Customs Duty inclusive of excise duty and cess thereon – The legislature by adding the second proviso to Rule 3(7)(a) w.e.f. 7.09.2009 to suppress the mischief, clear the confusion and resolve the issue. Therefore there is no reason not to allow the Cenvat credit on the Education Cess and SHE Cess component, forming part of CVD - Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-361-MAD|VAT |High Court Cases | 28.08.2015

... bmission of proof – violation of principles of natural justice – HELD - in the impugned assessment order it is stated that the Petitioner has not submitted any objections against the proposal of disallowing the claim of exemption for export sales, which is contrary to the truth - According to the petitioner, 95% of the sales are export sales and the Respondent ought to have called for necessary documents in respect of the export sales and had the petitioner was given an opportunity to produce all the required documents, the Petitioner would have furnished the same, relating to export sales to prove their claim for the year... [Read more]

... bmission of proof – violation of principles of natural justice – HELD - in the impugned assessment order it is stated that the Petitioner has not submitted any objections against the proposal of disallowing the claim of exemption for export sales, which is contrary to the truth - According to the petitioner, 95% of the sales are export sales and the Respondent ought to have called for necessary documents in respect of the export sales and had the petitioner was given an opportunity to produce all the required documents, the Petitioner would have furnished the same, relating to export sales to prove their claim for the year 2011-2012, but, however, such an opportunity was not given to the Petitioner. This act of the Respondent is nothing but violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the Petitioner can be afforded an opportunity, so as to produce all the required documents relating to export sales - the impugned assessment order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Respondent – Petition allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-354-AP-ST|SERVICE TAX |High Court Cases | 27.08.2015

... sit - Deputation of employees from Japan to work in India – Demand under manpower supply - Tribunal, vide the impugned order, waived the pre-deposit and granted stay of recovery till disposal of the appeal. Challenging the same, the Department filed the present appeal – HELD – The contention that the Tribunal ought not to have granted absolute waiver and also stay of recovery without imposing any condition, does not merit any consideration - The Tribunal had taken into consideration of the fact that the issue with regard to similar circumstances was already the subject matter of two decisions of the Tribunal at Delhi. In t... [Read more]

... sit - Deputation of employees from Japan to work in India – Demand under manpower supply - Tribunal, vide the impugned order, waived the pre-deposit and granted stay of recovery till disposal of the appeal. Challenging the same, the Department filed the present appeal – HELD – The contention that the Tribunal ought not to have granted absolute waiver and also stay of recovery without imposing any condition, does not merit any consideration - The Tribunal had taken into consideration of the fact that the issue with regard to similar circumstances was already the subject matter of two decisions of the Tribunal at Delhi. In that view of the matter, when the issue is squarely covered, there would be no justification for directing a pre-deposit. Hence, no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order – Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-451-CESTAT-CHE-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 27.08.2015

... cation service - CENVAT credit on the service tax paid on internet services availed from the main service provider for obtaining band width – HELD - the appellant’s claimed CENVAT credit on the service tax paid on internet services availed by them from the main service provider for obtaining band width and submitted that it is an input service for their output service. Since the appellants are rendering service and paid service tax under internet telecommunication service, they are eligible for input service credit on the inputs and input services - the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand... [Read more]

... cation service - CENVAT credit on the service tax paid on internet services availed from the main service provider for obtaining band width – HELD - the appellant’s claimed CENVAT credit on the service tax paid on internet services availed by them from the main service provider for obtaining band width and submitted that it is an input service for their output service. Since the appellants are rendering service and paid service tax under internet telecommunication service, they are eligible for input service credit on the inputs and input services - the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority to consider the issue of CENVAT credit on inputs and input service and also to re-determine the penalty – Appeal allowed by remand [Read less]

2015-VIL-453-CESTAT-DEL-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 27.08.2015

... loading, unloading and tug hire and labour arrangement – Revenue in appeal on the ground that the said activities do not fall under Port Services and Commissioner (Appeals) was not legally correct in permitting the refund merely because those activities were wrongly classified by the service provider under Section 65 (105) (zn) while paying service tax - Notification No. 41/2007-ST – HELD - If the service provider has actually paid service tax under Section 65 (105) (zn), the said notification exempts the same by way of refund if it is received by an exporter and used for export of goods. It is not open to the service reci... [Read more]

... loading, unloading and tug hire and labour arrangement – Revenue in appeal on the ground that the said activities do not fall under Port Services and Commissioner (Appeals) was not legally correct in permitting the refund merely because those activities were wrongly classified by the service provider under Section 65 (105) (zn) while paying service tax - Notification No. 41/2007-ST – HELD - If the service provider has actually paid service tax under Section 65 (105) (zn), the said notification exempts the same by way of refund if it is received by an exporter and used for export of goods. It is not open to the service recipient to question the classification of the service received by it as the issue of classification is only between the service provider and the jurisdictional service tax authorities and so as per the said Notification the condition is sufficiently fulfilled for granting the refund of such service tax – Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-356-KAR|VAT |High Court Cases | 27.08.2015

... ly of notice by the assessee - opportunity of personal hearing - principle of natural justice – HELD - It is true that if a party does not reply to the notice given by the Authority within the time specified in the notice, the Authority concerned would be justified in passing an exparte order. However, while passing such order, the Authority has to give reason why it is imposing tax or how the items would be covered for payment of tax. It cannot be said that merely because no reply to the notice has been given, the assessee would be liable to pay the tax, without giving a finding as to whether tax is liable to be paid on t... [Read more]

... ly of notice by the assessee - opportunity of personal hearing - principle of natural justice – HELD - It is true that if a party does not reply to the notice given by the Authority within the time specified in the notice, the Authority concerned would be justified in passing an exparte order. However, while passing such order, the Authority has to give reason why it is imposing tax or how the items would be covered for payment of tax. It cannot be said that merely because no reply to the notice has been given, the assessee would be liable to pay the tax, without giving a finding as to whether tax is liable to be paid on the items subjected to tax. Although not necessary, but the Authority could have given an opportunity of personal hearing before passing the order - The order of the Assessing Officer deserves to be set aside. Balancing the equities the appellant shall deposit 30% of the total amount payable – Partly in favour of assessee [Read less]

2015-VIL-452-CESTAT-MUM-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 27.08.2015

... ading of medicaments - In respect trading goods the price is fixed by NPPA under DPCO - appellant is getting the goods manufactured from a loan licencee unit located in area where no such excise duty is payable. Hence according to the revenue, in such cases appellant is deemed to have collected excise duty from their customers and hence are liable to deposit the same under the provisions of Section 11D of CEA, 1944 – HELD – Appellants are selling the goods at price fixed by NPPA. Further they are purchasing the same goods from the manufacture at the price fixed by NPPA with a discount of 12% or 26.5%. Prices are composite ... [Read more]

... ading of medicaments - In respect trading goods the price is fixed by NPPA under DPCO - appellant is getting the goods manufactured from a loan licencee unit located in area where no such excise duty is payable. Hence according to the revenue, in such cases appellant is deemed to have collected excise duty from their customers and hence are liable to deposit the same under the provisions of Section 11D of CEA, 1944 – HELD – Appellants are selling the goods at price fixed by NPPA. Further they are purchasing the same goods from the manufacture at the price fixed by NPPA with a discount of 12% or 26.5%. Prices are composite one and there is no separate indication of excise duty in the invoices either of appellant or loan licencee - Appellant is not the manufacturer of the goods and has not paid any excise duty. They are only trading and working with the profit on the discount extended by the manufacturer on the price fixed by NPPA. We find strength in the submission of the appellant that if at all there has to be any liability to pay any amount under Section 11D it will be with the manufacturer of the goods and not with them in the facts and circumstances of the case – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-355-BOM|VAT |High Court Cases | 27.08.2015

... f the cumulative quantum of benefits – Rule 46A - Reduction of sale price for levy of tax – Sale price - Certificate of Entitlement – Package Scheme of Incentives – Allowance of deduction as provided in Rule 46A of the Bombay Rules while calculating the CQB – HELD - The calculation of cumulative quantum of benefits shall be aggregate of the sums set out in Rule 31AA(2)(a) to (e) and we are concerned with clause (e) of sub-rule (2). That refers to a sum equal to the amount of tax which would have been payable to Government on any sales of products manufactured by the said dealer in the eligible unit and specified in the Eli... [Read more]

... f the cumulative quantum of benefits – Rule 46A - Reduction of sale price for levy of tax – Sale price - Certificate of Entitlement – Package Scheme of Incentives – Allowance of deduction as provided in Rule 46A of the Bombay Rules while calculating the CQB – HELD - The calculation of cumulative quantum of benefits shall be aggregate of the sums set out in Rule 31AA(2)(a) to (e) and we are concerned with clause (e) of sub-rule (2). That refers to a sum equal to the amount of tax which would have been payable to Government on any sales of products manufactured by the said dealer in the eligible unit and specified in the Eligibility Certificate granted to him by the implementing agency. The Tribunal concluded that this assessment and covered by clause (e) cannot be made in the case of the present applicant simply because the applicant is not required to pay any tax to the Government. The reason being if there is an exemption enjoyed by the applicant, then, the sale price would not include the tax element. Thus, the conclusion reached is that for the purposes of clause (e) of sub-rule (2), the requirement would be a sum equal to the amount of tax which would have been payable to Government on any sale of products manufactured by the said dealer in the eligible unit and specified in the Eligibility Certificate granted to him by the implementing agency if the said dealer was not holding the certificate of entitlement - this assessment could not have been made as all the invoices would indicate that the sale price was not to include the component of sales tax. The tax element could not have been, therefore, forming a part of the price and as depicted in the invoices. That is why and for that limited purpose the language of Rule 46A has been taken assistance of. The Tribunal has correctly come to the conclusion that the sale effected by the dealer is not liable for payment of sales tax. Therefore, the calculation of the CQB as made in this case is not required to be altered or changed – Assessee appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-357-P&H-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |High Court Cases | 27.08.2015

... ion 11-B of the CEA, 1944 - Rule 18 of the CER, 2002 - refund of the duty paid for the exported goods – Denial of rebate on the ground of limitation - The petitioner exported certain goods on payment of duty and filed the ARE-I Forms within 48 hours from the date of clearance of the goods. The other documents were, however, admittedly, filed more than a year thereafter - The adjudicating authority rejected the claim for rebate on the ground that it was barred by limitation under Section 11-B. The appellate authority also dismissed the claim on the same ground – HELD – Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, expressly pr... [Read more]

... ion 11-B of the CEA, 1944 - Rule 18 of the CER, 2002 - refund of the duty paid for the exported goods – Denial of rebate on the ground of limitation - The petitioner exported certain goods on payment of duty and filed the ARE-I Forms within 48 hours from the date of clearance of the goods. The other documents were, however, admittedly, filed more than a year thereafter - The adjudicating authority rejected the claim for rebate on the ground that it was barred by limitation under Section 11-B. The appellate authority also dismissed the claim on the same ground – HELD – Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, expressly provides that where any goods are exported the Central Government may by notification grant a rebate of the duty paid and that rebate shall be subject to such conditions or limitations, if any, and fulfilment of such procedure as may be specified in the notification. - It is held, therefore, that the petitioner’s claim for refund would be governed by rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with the notification issued thereunder. The said notification does not provide any period of limitation for a claim for rebate. The rejection of the petitioner’s claim for rebate, therefore, is not well founded - The impugned order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) is quashed and set aside. The application for rebate shall be processed and dealt with in accordance with law on the basis that it is not barred by the period of limitation prescribed in Section 11-B the Central Excise Act, 1944 – Assessee petition allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-354-P&H|VAT |High Court Cases | 27.08.2015

... rvice of order at branch address – HELD – Under Rule 71(1)(a) of PVAT Rules, 2005 it was mandatory upon the Department to send the copy of the order to appellant at the address given in its memorandum of appeal. However, the order was sent at the Branch Office of the appellant, which as per appellant was never received - In view of the above factual position, the learned Tribunal has wrongly drawn presumption of service upon the appellant under Section 27 of the General Clause Act, 1897 and the illustration (f) to Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act - It is well settled that a party should not be condemned unheard and t... [Read more]

... rvice of order at branch address – HELD – Under Rule 71(1)(a) of PVAT Rules, 2005 it was mandatory upon the Department to send the copy of the order to appellant at the address given in its memorandum of appeal. However, the order was sent at the Branch Office of the appellant, which as per appellant was never received - In view of the above factual position, the learned Tribunal has wrongly drawn presumption of service upon the appellant under Section 27 of the General Clause Act, 1897 and the illustration (f) to Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act - It is well settled that a party should not be condemned unheard and the case should not be rejected on technical grounds, rather should be decided on merit unless delay is attributable to gross negligence of a party - The application of the appellant filed before the Tribunal seeking condonation of 907 days’ delay in filing the appeal is hereby allowed and the aforesaid delay in filing the appeal is condoned – Appeal allowed by remand [Read less]

2015-VIL-450-CESTAT-DEL-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 26.08.2015

... ervice – leasing of tower space - Suppression of facts – Interest and penalty – HELD - Leased circuit service - the dedicated dark fibre cable link was provided to a subscriber by the assessee as a telegraph authority and therefore all the requirements of Section 65(105))(zd) (according to which the taxable service is ‘to subscriber by a telegraph in relation to a leased circuit’) are clearly satisfied inasmuch as leased circuits were provided by the appellant, whose is a telegraph authority, to a subscriber. Thus the demand pertaining to leased circuit service is clearly sustainable on merit - Appellant is guilty of suppr... [Read more]

... ervice – leasing of tower space - Suppression of facts – Interest and penalty – HELD - Leased circuit service - the dedicated dark fibre cable link was provided to a subscriber by the assessee as a telegraph authority and therefore all the requirements of Section 65(105))(zd) (according to which the taxable service is ‘to subscriber by a telegraph in relation to a leased circuit’) are clearly satisfied inasmuch as leased circuits were provided by the appellant, whose is a telegraph authority, to a subscriber. Thus the demand pertaining to leased circuit service is clearly sustainable on merit - Appellant is guilty of suppression of fact and therefore the extended period has rightly been invoked and mandatory penalty is clearly imposable - Leasing of tower space does not fit under any limb of the definition of Business Auxiliary Service - demand confirmed under Business Auxiliary Service on the amount received for lease of tower space on its microwave towers to various cellular operators is not sustainable - Appeal partly allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-91-SC-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |Supreme Court Cases | 26.08.2015

... Guard is to be treated as merely a skin care preparation or it is a medicament having curing properties – Revenue seeks to classification under Chapter 33 whereas assessee under Chapter 30 – medicament, cosmetic or drug - HELD – Vaseline Intensive Care Heel Guard, is marketed as a solution for cracked heels - the effect of mitigation of an external condition is primary effect and the effect of smoothing the skin was secondary in nature and, therefore, it was to be treated as a medicament and classified under Chapter 30 - Though the burden was on the Department, it did not lead any evidence or produce any material to disch... [Read more]

... Guard is to be treated as merely a skin care preparation or it is a medicament having curing properties – Revenue seeks to classification under Chapter 33 whereas assessee under Chapter 30 – medicament, cosmetic or drug - HELD – Vaseline Intensive Care Heel Guard, is marketed as a solution for cracked heels - the effect of mitigation of an external condition is primary effect and the effect of smoothing the skin was secondary in nature and, therefore, it was to be treated as a medicament and classified under Chapter 30 - Though the burden was on the Department, it did not lead any evidence or produce any material to discharge this onus – Tribunal decision holding the product as a medicament and, therefore, covered by Chapter Heading 3003.10 is perfectly justified and does not call for any interference – Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-351-ALH-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |High Court Cases | 26.08.2015

... tay order beyond the specified maximum time limit prescribed in Section 35-C(2-A) of the Central Excise Act – HELD - Section 35C (2A) of the Act as amended in 2002 and 2013 makes it apparently clear that the Tribunal was mandated to hear every appeal within a period of three years 'where it is possible to do so’ – This indicates that though a mandate was given to decide the appeal within three years, it was not a mandatory provision, but, only a directory provision - If the main provision cannot be treated as mandatory, the first, second and third proviso also cannot be treated as mandatory - strict interpretation of the t... [Read more]

... tay order beyond the specified maximum time limit prescribed in Section 35-C(2-A) of the Central Excise Act – HELD - Section 35C (2A) of the Act as amended in 2002 and 2013 makes it apparently clear that the Tribunal was mandated to hear every appeal within a period of three years 'where it is possible to do so’ – This indicates that though a mandate was given to decide the appeal within three years, it was not a mandatory provision, but, only a directory provision - If the main provision cannot be treated as mandatory, the first, second and third proviso also cannot be treated as mandatory - strict interpretation of the three provisos to section 35C (2A) of the Act would defeat justice and would lead to a miscarriage of justice - The omission of the first, second and third proviso w.e.f. 6.8.2014 would mean that the appeal filed by an assessee needs to be disposed of within a period of three years and stay orders which have been passed by the Tribunal would continue to remain in force unless it is limited by the Tribunal itself - The contention that the appeals filed before 6.8.2014 would continue to be governed by first, second and third proviso to Section 35C(2A) of the Act in view of the second proviso contained in Section 35F of the Act which came into effect from 6.8.2014 is patently erroneous – Revenue appeals dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-90-SC-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |Supreme Court Cases | 26.08.2015

... ridges and Components – Section 4 after the amendment of 2000 - assessable value – transaction value - Disallowance of deductions claimed on account of volume discount, sales tax and cash discount – Sale price – Place of removal – HELD - The expression “actually paid or payable for the goods, when sold” only means that whatever is agreed to as the price for the goods forms the basis of value, whether such price has been paid, has been paid in part, or has not been paid at all. The basis of “transaction value” is therefore the agreed contractual price - the expression “when sold” is not meant to indicate the time at which s... [Read more]

... ridges and Components – Section 4 after the amendment of 2000 - assessable value – transaction value - Disallowance of deductions claimed on account of volume discount, sales tax and cash discount – Sale price – Place of removal – HELD - The expression “actually paid or payable for the goods, when sold” only means that whatever is agreed to as the price for the goods forms the basis of value, whether such price has been paid, has been paid in part, or has not been paid at all. The basis of “transaction value” is therefore the agreed contractual price - the expression “when sold” is not meant to indicate the time at which such goods are sold, but is meant to indicate that goods are the subject matter of an agreement of sale. Once this becomes clear, the argument of the assessee is necessarily be accepted inasmuch as cash discount is something which is “known” at or prior to the clearance of the goods, being contained in the agreement of sale between the assessee and its buyers, and must therefore be deducted from the sale price in order to arrive at the value of excisable goods “at the time of removal” - Therefore, ‘cash discount’ has to be taken into account in arriving at “price” even under Section 4 as amended in 2000 – Matter remanded – Appeal disposed in favour of assessee [Read less]

2015-VIL-352-ALH-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |High Court Cases | 26.08.2015

... n – Interest - Provisional assessment – Liability to pay interest on differential duty even though the differential duty was paid prior to the date of the passing of the final assessment order – HELD - Merely because the differential amount of duty is ascertained consequent to the finalisation of assessment, the due date for payment of such amount never changes nor is extended. It would always relate to the date of removal of the goods thereof - only the quantification of the differential amount of duty is ascertained consequent to the finalisation of assessment, and that too merely because the assessee was not able to asc... [Read more]

... n – Interest - Provisional assessment – Liability to pay interest on differential duty even though the differential duty was paid prior to the date of the passing of the final assessment order – HELD - Merely because the differential amount of duty is ascertained consequent to the finalisation of assessment, the due date for payment of such amount never changes nor is extended. It would always relate to the date of removal of the goods thereof - only the quantification of the differential amount of duty is ascertained consequent to the finalisation of assessment, and that too merely because the assessee was not able to ascertain the exact quantum of duty in the absence of sufficient material to finalize the valuation of the goods at the time of clearance of goods. The due date for payment of duty is statutorily fixed being the date of removal of the goods consequent to the manufacture thereof and the same cannot be changed - The expression ‘for’ as provided under Rule 7(4) of the Rules of 2002 refers to the month for which the amount is determined pursuant to the finalisation of assessment and hence, interest liability would commence from the month succeeding the month for which the duty was due and payable - Interest is leviable even where differential duty was paid prior to the finalisation of the assessment in view of Rule 7(4) of the Rules of 2002 – The Court followed Apex Court ruling in the case SKF India Ltd & International Auto Ltd and differed with Bombay High Court order in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd and CEAT Ltd – Assessee appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-353-KER|VAT |High Court Cases | 26.08.2015

... lity of on rental charges received for letting out the hoardings for outdoor marketing – Hoarding as ‘goods’ - Whether structures which are permanently attached and fastened on earth are immovable property, can such structures be considered as 'goods' within the meaning Act - effective control of the hoarding during hire - Transfer of Property – HELD - The structure involved in this case is concerned, taking into account of the explanations of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is fastened to earth and is detachable easily and therefore, is not an immovable property - so far as leasing out of hoardings in this case... [Read more]

... lity of on rental charges received for letting out the hoardings for outdoor marketing – Hoarding as ‘goods’ - Whether structures which are permanently attached and fastened on earth are immovable property, can such structures be considered as 'goods' within the meaning Act - effective control of the hoarding during hire - Transfer of Property – HELD - The structure involved in this case is concerned, taking into account of the explanations of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is fastened to earth and is detachable easily and therefore, is not an immovable property - so far as leasing out of hoardings in this case are concerned, once it is let out by entering into an agreement or work order, the owner of the goods ceases to have any control over the same - the absolute control of the hoardings is transferred to the lessee by virtue of the work order. Therefore, the control of the hoardings once it is passed for erecting advertising materials is left with the lessee absolutely for the period specified and therefore there is transfer of right to use as provided under Section 6(1)(c) of the Act - after the introduction of sub-article 29A and clause (d) of Article 366, there is a clear power conferred on the Legislature to impose tax on the transfer of right to use any goods for any purpose - So the duty casted on the authority was to find out whether there is a transfer of right by an assessee to a third person for the use of goods and once it is found, the assessee is liable to pay tax - Revision filed by the assessee fails and accordingly same is dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-350-MAD-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |High Court Cases | 26.08.2015

... HELD - As against the order of the first appellate authority that there was no suppression, the Tribunal did not record any finding – The Tribunal appears to have taken up the appeal after seven years and disposed it off at one stroke - it is seen from the order of the Tribunal that the finding of the first appellate authority to the effect that there was no suppression of fact, has not been interfered with. If the original authority had invoked the enhanced period of limitation on only one particular ground viz., suppression of fact and the appellate authority had set aside that finding, the larger period of limitation wa... [Read more]

... HELD - As against the order of the first appellate authority that there was no suppression, the Tribunal did not record any finding – The Tribunal appears to have taken up the appeal after seven years and disposed it off at one stroke - it is seen from the order of the Tribunal that the finding of the first appellate authority to the effect that there was no suppression of fact, has not been interfered with. If the original authority had invoked the enhanced period of limitation on only one particular ground viz., suppression of fact and the appellate authority had set aside that finding, the larger period of limitation was not available to the Department themselves in view of the fact that the Tribunal did not interfere with the finding of the first appellate authority relating to the only basis on which the enhanced period of limitation was taken recourse to by the Department - The show cause notice was issued beyond the period of limitation – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-449-CESTAT-AHM-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 26.08.2015

... - Whether appellant is required to pay an amount equivalent to 8% or 6% with respect to exempted activities under taken by the job worker which are exempted under Notification No. 8/2005 dated 01.03.2005 – HELD - The appellant factory cannot be both a ‘manufacturer’ and a ‘service provider’ at the same time in relation to a particular activity. It is settled proposition in Central Excise matters that a job worker is a ‘manufacturer’ and hence the appellant factory cannot be treated as a service provider rendering exempted/non-taxable service for the manufacturing activity. Therefore, there is no force in the Revenue’s cont... [Read more]

... - Whether appellant is required to pay an amount equivalent to 8% or 6% with respect to exempted activities under taken by the job worker which are exempted under Notification No. 8/2005 dated 01.03.2005 – HELD - The appellant factory cannot be both a ‘manufacturer’ and a ‘service provider’ at the same time in relation to a particular activity. It is settled proposition in Central Excise matters that a job worker is a ‘manufacturer’ and hence the appellant factory cannot be treated as a service provider rendering exempted/non-taxable service for the manufacturing activity. Therefore, there is no force in the Revenue’s contention that the appellant had rendered exempted/non-taxable service - Issue no more res-integra – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-347-MAD-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |High Court Cases | 25.08.2015

... ility on by-product and waste product - Whether the 'fly ash' and 'fly ash bricks' included as items in the entries to the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, per se make the same exigible to excise duty – HELD - commodity 'fly ash' cannot be subjected to levy of excise duty because it is not an item of goods which has been subjected to process of manufacture and as such it did not satisfy the test of being manufactured in India as envisaged in the provisions of the Act - The impugned SCN is set aside in so far as it concerned to the imposition of excise duty, interest and penalty in respect of 'fly ash' alone... [Read more]

... ility on by-product and waste product - Whether the 'fly ash' and 'fly ash bricks' included as items in the entries to the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, per se make the same exigible to excise duty – HELD - commodity 'fly ash' cannot be subjected to levy of excise duty because it is not an item of goods which has been subjected to process of manufacture and as such it did not satisfy the test of being manufactured in India as envisaged in the provisions of the Act - The impugned SCN is set aside in so far as it concerned to the imposition of excise duty, interest and penalty in respect of 'fly ash' alone - Writ petition partly allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-446-CESTAT-CHE-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 25.08.2015

... he ground that no duty paid clearances were made by appellant as a job worker - goods suffered duty ultimately in the hands of principal manufacturer – HELD - since the acquisition of capital goods and use thereof in manufacture was not in dispute, in absence of any provision in law capital goods credit cannot be denied to a manufacturer who was also a job worker - When the job worker was entitled to the exemption under mandate of notification, that does not alter characteristics of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the CEA, 1944. Therefore, denial of capital goods credit to the appellant is uncalled for - Assessee appeal ... [Read more]

... he ground that no duty paid clearances were made by appellant as a job worker - goods suffered duty ultimately in the hands of principal manufacturer – HELD - since the acquisition of capital goods and use thereof in manufacture was not in dispute, in absence of any provision in law capital goods credit cannot be denied to a manufacturer who was also a job worker - When the job worker was entitled to the exemption under mandate of notification, that does not alter characteristics of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the CEA, 1944. Therefore, denial of capital goods credit to the appellant is uncalled for - Assessee appeal allowed and Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-445-CESTAT-AHM-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 25.08.2015

... ed treating the same as refund of Rule 173L of CER 1944, r/w Section 11B of the CEA, 1944 – Repackaging and export of goods of returned goods – HELD - Appellant in the present proceedings is a merchant exporter and not a person who undertook first manufacture and subsequent processing of the returned goods - Appellant will be interested to get rebate claim of the duty paid before the returned goods were allowed to be cleared under Rule 173 H of the erstwhile CER 1944, on the documents relating to export of goods. Rule 173 L of the erstwhile CER, 1944 can be followed only by the manufacture/re-manufacture of the goods and n... [Read more]

... ed treating the same as refund of Rule 173L of CER 1944, r/w Section 11B of the CEA, 1944 – Repackaging and export of goods of returned goods – HELD - Appellant in the present proceedings is a merchant exporter and not a person who undertook first manufacture and subsequent processing of the returned goods - Appellant will be interested to get rebate claim of the duty paid before the returned goods were allowed to be cleared under Rule 173 H of the erstwhile CER 1944, on the documents relating to export of goods. Rule 173 L of the erstwhile CER, 1944 can be followed only by the manufacture/re-manufacture of the goods and not by the merchant exporter. As the main dispute agitated by the appellant is that their claim is one of rebate and not refund under Rule 173L, this Bench agree with the contention of the assessee that it is a case of rebate and CESTAT does not have the jurisdiction to entertain this appeal - appellant is disposed of as an appeal filed without jurisdiction. Appellant is at liberty to file appeal with the appropriate authority [Read less]

2015-VIL-346-DEL|VAT |High Court Cases | 25.08.2015

... ves from selling dealers subsequent to sales – Demand for adjustment of input tax and reversal of ITC claimed against the discount / incentives received from the selling dealer – Assessment – Demand – Prospective amendment - Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the appellants were required to reverse input tax credits claimed on purchases made by them on account of credit notes issued by selling dealers, despite the selling dealers having confirmed that they have not reduced their output tax liability and Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, it can be said that the returns filed by the appellants w... [Read more]

... ves from selling dealers subsequent to sales – Demand for adjustment of input tax and reversal of ITC claimed against the discount / incentives received from the selling dealer – Assessment – Demand – Prospective amendment - Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the appellants were required to reverse input tax credits claimed on purchases made by them on account of credit notes issued by selling dealers, despite the selling dealers having confirmed that they have not reduced their output tax liability and Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, it can be said that the returns filed by the appellants were false, misleading or deceptive, attracting penalty U/S 86(10) of the Act – HELD - In all these cases, the Appellants have been able to produce certificates from the selling dealers who have clarified that they are not claiming any output tax credit or seeking any refund. In other words, the entire amount of VAT collected by the selling dealer from the buying dealer is remitted to the Department. Therefore, there is no question of the selling dealer resorting to the procedure under Section 51(a) of the DVAT Act to raise a credit note in accordance with Rule 45 of the DVAT Rules, or to notify that on account of an arrangement with the buying dealer the selling price has been altered. Consequently, there is no corresponding obligation on either of them to resort to the procedure under Section 8 (1) of the DVAT Act. There is also, therefore, no obligation on the buying dealer to resort to the procedure under Section 10 (1) of the Act. This, of course, is the scenario prior to the introduction of Section 10 (5) to the Act which is only prospective and not as, contended by the Revenue, merely clarificatory - Tribunal erred in holding that the Appellants were required to reverse the ITC claimed on purchases made by them - The returns filed by the Appellants could not be held to be false, misleading or deceptive thus attracting penalty under Section 86 (10) of the DVAT Act – In favour of assessees [Read less]

2015-VIL-348-GUJ|VAT |High Court Cases | 25.08.2015

... e ground that the registration of the dealer/seller who had sold the goods to the assessee has been cancelled with retrospective effect – Department challenging the order of tribunal by which interest demanded and penalty were set aside – HELD - Following the judgement in Cosmos International Limited - Tribunal has committed no error in removing the interest as well as penalty imposed upon the assessee – When assessee had purchased goods from dealer/seller, he was registered under provisions of VAT Act and subsequently, his registration was cancelled. Therefore assessee cannot be deprived of his right of getting credit of ... [Read more]

... e ground that the registration of the dealer/seller who had sold the goods to the assessee has been cancelled with retrospective effect – Department challenging the order of tribunal by which interest demanded and penalty were set aside – HELD - Following the judgement in Cosmos International Limited - Tribunal has committed no error in removing the interest as well as penalty imposed upon the assessee – When assessee had purchased goods from dealer/seller, he was registered under provisions of VAT Act and subsequently, his registration was cancelled. Therefore assessee cannot be deprived of his right of getting credit of input tax available under provisions of GVAT Act – Whatever may be effect of retrospective cancellation upon selling dealer, it can have no effect upon any person who has acted upon strength of registration certificate when registration was current – In favour of assessee [Read less]

2015-VIL-447-CESTAT-MUM-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 25.08.2015

... related services, technical testing and analyzing services – HELD - Circular No. 134/3/2011 dated 08.04.2011 was issued specifically noting the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Balasore Alloys Ltd and the Board’s view is ‘if that education cess paid on the service tax by the service providers is also to be refunded to appellants’ - If the service tax liability is discharged on which education cess is paid on the goods exported, the benefit of refund of such education cess paid should not be denied when the export of goods is not in dispute – Assessee appeal allowed... [Read more]

... related services, technical testing and analyzing services – HELD - Circular No. 134/3/2011 dated 08.04.2011 was issued specifically noting the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Balasore Alloys Ltd and the Board’s view is ‘if that education cess paid on the service tax by the service providers is also to be refunded to appellants’ - If the service tax liability is discharged on which education cess is paid on the goods exported, the benefit of refund of such education cess paid should not be denied when the export of goods is not in dispute – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-448-CESTAT-AHM-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 25.08.2015

... ding the service of ‘maintenance and repairs of plant and equipments’ of clients like M/s Essar Steels Ltd and M/s Reliance Industries Ltd – Demand alongwith interest and impose penalty under the category of ‘Repair and Maintenance Service’ for the period July 2003 to March 2005 – Adjudicating Authority dropped the proceedings – Revenue in appeal – HELD - Provisions of Section 65(64) and (105) (zzg) of the Act provides where a manufacturer or any person authorized by him provides a service in relation to the Maintenance, Repair or Servicing of any goods, or equipments excluding a motor vehicle, such service provided is exi... [Read more]

... ding the service of ‘maintenance and repairs of plant and equipments’ of clients like M/s Essar Steels Ltd and M/s Reliance Industries Ltd – Demand alongwith interest and impose penalty under the category of ‘Repair and Maintenance Service’ for the period July 2003 to March 2005 – Adjudicating Authority dropped the proceedings – Revenue in appeal – HELD - Provisions of Section 65(64) and (105) (zzg) of the Act provides where a manufacturer or any person authorized by him provides a service in relation to the Maintenance, Repair or Servicing of any goods, or equipments excluding a motor vehicle, such service provided is exigible to Service Tax - Following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Anand Transformers Pvt Ltd the demand of tax alongwith interest are upheld and the imposition of penalty is dropped – Revenue appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-345-MP|VAT |High Court Cases | 24.08.2015

... o use - Mobile Operators Shared Towers - Passive Infrastructure Services to mobile phone operators - Telecommunication infrastructure - Whether the provisions of Passive Infrastructure Services by the petitioner to share operator's would tantamount to 'transfer of right to use goods' as per Section 2(u)(vi) of the MPVAT Act, 2002 – HELD - When the petitioner has not transferred the possession of the passive infrastructure to the sharing telecom operators in the manner understood in law, the limited access provided to them can only be regarded as a permissive use or a limited licence to use the same. The possession of the p... [Read more]

... o use - Mobile Operators Shared Towers - Passive Infrastructure Services to mobile phone operators - Telecommunication infrastructure - Whether the provisions of Passive Infrastructure Services by the petitioner to share operator's would tantamount to 'transfer of right to use goods' as per Section 2(u)(vi) of the MPVAT Act, 2002 – HELD - When the petitioner has not transferred the possession of the passive infrastructure to the sharing telecom operators in the manner understood in law, the limited access provided to them can only be regarded as a permissive use or a limited licence to use the same. The possession of the passive infrastructure always remained with the petitioner. The sharing telecom operators did not therefore, have any right to use the passive infrastructure - The entire infrastructure is in the physical control and possession of assessee at all times and there is no parting of the same nor any transfer of the right to use the equipment or apparatus - The permission granted to the telecom operator to have access to the passive infrastructure for limited purposes is loosely termed by the taxing authorities as "a right to use the passive infrastructure" - The impugned order passed on the basis that the petitioner transferred the right to use passive infrastructure to the sharing telecom operators is quashed – Writ petition allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-444-CESTAT-CHE-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 24.08.2015

... a manufacturer of cement was directed by Pollution control Board to prevent pollution by planting trees in its factory area – Planting of trees – Credit disallowed terming it as maintenance of garden – HELD - Planting of trees that cannot be equated with maintenance of garden - considering that a cement factory requires planting of the trees and maintenance thereof to prevent pollution, claim of the respondent as to the service tax paid for such maintenance to make it eligible is undeniable - Accordingly, Revenue appeal is dismissed... [Read more]

... a manufacturer of cement was directed by Pollution control Board to prevent pollution by planting trees in its factory area – Planting of trees – Credit disallowed terming it as maintenance of garden – HELD - Planting of trees that cannot be equated with maintenance of garden - considering that a cement factory requires planting of the trees and maintenance thereof to prevent pollution, claim of the respondent as to the service tax paid for such maintenance to make it eligible is undeniable - Accordingly, Revenue appeal is dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-443-CESTAT-MUM-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 24.08.2015

... - transportation of Bauxite Ore was undertaken by Goods Transport Agency on behalf of the assessee who is a sole proprietorship firm - Circular No.79/9/2004-ST dated 17.12.2004 has clarified on the issue which is in this appeal wherein a person making payment towards freight would be liable to pay the service tax in case the consignor or consignee of the goods transported falls in one of the category as enumerated in the Circular - It is undisputed that the respondent-assessee does not fall under any of the category – Accordingly, the impugned orders of the first appellate authority is correct and sustainable and do not re... [Read more]

... - transportation of Bauxite Ore was undertaken by Goods Transport Agency on behalf of the assessee who is a sole proprietorship firm - Circular No.79/9/2004-ST dated 17.12.2004 has clarified on the issue which is in this appeal wherein a person making payment towards freight would be liable to pay the service tax in case the consignor or consignee of the goods transported falls in one of the category as enumerated in the Circular - It is undisputed that the respondent-assessee does not fall under any of the category – Accordingly, the impugned orders of the first appellate authority is correct and sustainable and do not require any interference – Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-89-SC-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |Supreme Court Cases | 24.08.2015

... consideration – Deemed export – Assessee availed benefit of duty drawback when advance licence holder buyers surrendered the accrued benefits in favour of assessee - Whether such benefit would constitute ‘additional consideration’ received by the assessee as per the definition of ‘transaction value’ contained in Section 4 of the Act read with Rule 6 of the Rules – HELD - Transfer of advance import licence in favour of the seller by the buyer enabling the seller of the goods to effect duty free import of the raw materials and bringing down the cost of production/procurement, is a consideration, the monetary value of which h... [Read more]

... consideration – Deemed export – Assessee availed benefit of duty drawback when advance licence holder buyers surrendered the accrued benefits in favour of assessee - Whether such benefit would constitute ‘additional consideration’ received by the assessee as per the definition of ‘transaction value’ contained in Section 4 of the Act read with Rule 6 of the Rules – HELD - Transfer of advance import licence in favour of the seller by the buyer enabling the seller of the goods to effect duty free import of the raw materials and bringing down the cost of production/procurement, is a consideration, the monetary value of which has to be considered under the provisions of Rule 6 – There is no reason to deviate from the decision rendered by Apex Court in IFGL case - Assessee plea referring the matter to a larger Bench is rejected – Revenue appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-438-CESTAT-CHE-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 24.08.2015

... tory bricks – Whether the amount received as bonus by the assessee from its buyers for the performance of converter bricks/refractory bricks would be included in the assessable value – HELD - Subsequent dealings between the assessee and the buyer on account of performance or otherwise of the goods is not of any concern in regard to the sale price of the goods at the time of removal - There is no justification for treating the bonus amount as part of the price of the goods and demanding duty on the basis of bonus received from the buyers for better performance of the bricks – Bonus amount not includible in the assessable va... [Read more]

... tory bricks – Whether the amount received as bonus by the assessee from its buyers for the performance of converter bricks/refractory bricks would be included in the assessable value – HELD - Subsequent dealings between the assessee and the buyer on account of performance or otherwise of the goods is not of any concern in regard to the sale price of the goods at the time of removal - There is no justification for treating the bonus amount as part of the price of the goods and demanding duty on the basis of bonus received from the buyers for better performance of the bricks – Bonus amount not includible in the assessable value – Assessee appeal allowed, revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]