Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal rules sales tax concession affects assessable value; penalties not applicable as per Apex Court decisions.</h1> <h3>C.C.E. Delhi-III Gurgaon Versus M/s. NHK Spring India Ltd., M/s. Innovative Tech Pack Ltd., M/s. Spaceage Switchgears Ltd., M/s. Neel Metal Products Ltd., M/s. Hi Lex India Pvt. Ltd.</h3> The Tribunal held that the sales tax concession retained by the respondent must be added to the assessable value of goods sold. The demands related to the ... Valuation - includability - amount of sales tax concession retained by the respondent - Held that:- the issue has been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. CCE Delhi [2014 (9) TMI 229 - SUPREME COURT] and Super Synotex (India) Ltd. Vs. CCE Jaipur [2014 (3) TMI 42 - SUPREME COURT] wherein Hon’ble Apex Court has held that amount of sales tax concession retained by the respondent is required to be added in the assessable value. Therefore, the issue is no more res integra and we hold that the impugned orders are not correct on merits. Invokation of extended period of limitation - Demand and imposition of penalty - Held that:- as there were view taken by the CBEC Circular and this Tribunal in favour of the respondent which has been negated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the decision cited. In these circumstances, we hold that extended period of limitation is not invokable. Consequently, demand pertaining to the extended period of limitation which is sought to be demanded from the respondent are set aside. Consequently, the penalties on the respondents are not imposable. - Appeal allowed by way of remand Issues involved:Interpretation of sales tax concession retained by the respondent and its impact on assessable value under Central Excise Act 1944; Applicability of extended period of limitation for demanding duty and imposing penalties.Analysis:The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against impugned orders concerning the treatment of sales tax subsidy as capital receipts by the respondent, leading to a dispute regarding the assessable value of goods sold. The respondents, manufacturers of excisable goods, had retained amounts collected as sales tax from buyers under a tax waiver scheme by the Government of Haryana. The Revenue argued that these amounts should be included in the assessable value of goods sold, making the respondents liable to pay duty. The adjudicating authority upheld the demand for duty, interest, and penalties, which was challenged by the respondents before the Ld. Commissioner (A) citing precedents like Kinetic Engineering Ltd. Vs. CCE Pune, Nagpur-2012. The Revenue contended that the sales tax concession retained should be added to the assessable value based on judgments like Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. CCE Delhi-2014 and Super Synotex (India) Ltd. Vs. CCE Jaipur-2014, which clarified this issue.The Tribunal noted that the Hon'ble Apex Court had settled the issue, holding that the sales tax concession retained by the respondent must be added to the assessable value. Therefore, the impugned orders were deemed incorrect on merits. However, the respondents raised a contention on the limitation period, referring to a CBEC Circular from 2000 and previous Tribunal decisions supporting their view. The Tribunal acknowledged these precedents but emphasized that the Apex Court's decisions overruled them, making the extended period of limitation inapplicable. Consequently, the demands related to the extended period were set aside, and penalties were deemed non-imposable. The appeals were disposed of by remanding the case to the adjudicating authority to quantify the demand within the limitation period, to be paid by the respondent along with interest within 30 days of quantification.In conclusion, the Tribunal clarified the treatment of sales tax concession retained by the respondent, the impact on the assessable value, and the applicability of the limitation period for demanding duty and penalties. The judgment highlighted the precedence set by the Apex Court, overruling previous interpretations and guiding the quantification and payment process within the specified timeframe.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found