1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appellate Tribunal CESTAT rules pillows not gifts, part of set sold. Impugned order set aside.</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi ruled in favor of the appellants in a case involving the valuation of mattresses and pillows sold together. The ... Valuation Issues: Valuation of mattresses and pillows sold together; Whether pillows were being gifted or part of the setThe judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi revolves around the dispute concerning the valuation of mattresses and pillows sold together by the appellants. The impugned order assumed that the pillow was being supplied free, leading to a duty liability on the pillows as well. The contention of the assessee was that both items were sold as a 'set' and not gifted separately. The appellant presented declarations and price lists to support their claim that the price of pillows was included in the set price. The Tribunal noted that the appellants were indeed selling the mattresses and pillows as a 'set', as evidenced by the price declarations. Therefore, the finding that pillows were being gifted was deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal rejected the argument based on the earlier sales pattern and prices, emphasizing that the appellant had the right to change the sales pattern and revise prices. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants, with any consequential relief granted to them.In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision clarified the valuation issue by determining that the pillows were not being gifted but were part of the set sold by the appellants. The judgment underscored the importance of considering the actual sales pattern and price declarations provided by the appellant in establishing the nature of the transaction. By emphasizing the right of the assessee to modify the sales pattern and prices, the Tribunal upheld the appellant's argument that the pillows were not gifted but included in the set price. This comprehensive analysis led to the setting aside of the impugned order and the allowance of the appeal, providing relief to the appellants in the matter.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
