TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Settlement Commission Decision on Duty Liabilities: Lumax Sarnlip Industries Ltd.</h1> The Settlement Commission accepted M/s. Lumax Sarnlip Industries Ltd.'s arguments on duty liabilities related to reimbursement and price escalation but ... Settlement of case - Valuation Issues:Settlement of duty liability on various grounds including reimbursement, price escalation, notional interest, and Modvat credit availed on capital goods.Analysis:The judgment pertains to a case involving M/s. Lumax Sarnlip Industries Ltd., Sriperumbudhur, manufacturing headlamps for M/s. Hyundai Motors. The Settlement Commission admitted the company's application to settle proceedings initiated against them, which included duty liabilities on different grounds. The company admitted and paid duty liabilities related to reimbursement and price escalation but contested the proposed recovery on notional interest and Modvat credit on capital goods. The consultant representing the company argued that the duty liability on notional interest waived for a part loan was not payable due to the absence of a nexus between the loan and price fixation, citing relevant case laws. Additionally, he contended that ownership of capital goods is not a prerequisite for availing Modvat credit, referencing legal precedents supporting this claim.During the hearing, the Revenue representative highlighted the department's appeal against a previous decision but acknowledged no stay on the decision. The department argued that the waiver of interest by HMIL on the loan component constituted additional consideration received by the applicant. The judgment carefully examined both sides' contentions and found that the department's attempt to load assessable value with notional interest waived on the part loan was not legally sustainable. It was noted that ownership is not a prerequisite for entitlement of credit in respect of capital goods, citing relevant tribunal decisions and circulars.Ultimately, the Settlement Commission accepted the consultant's arguments regarding the disputed demands, considering the company's immediate payment of admitted duty liabilities, true disclosure, and cooperation with the proceedings. The case was settled under the Central Excise Act, granting immunity from interest, penalty, and prosecution as proposed in the show cause notice. The duty liability was settled at Rs. 21,14,167, and the company was granted immunities under the relevant provisions of the Act. The judgment emphasized the binding nature of tribunal decisions and circulars in such matters, ensuring a fair and just settlement process.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
