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
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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 allows quantity discount in Central Excise duty calculation</h1> The Tribunal allowed the deduction of quantity discount in Central Excise duty calculation, stating that known and understood trade discounts at the time ... Trade discount - appellant had given quantity discount to their customers as per their quantity discount schemes - price charged was for quantity lesser than the quantity actually supplied, which has the effect of reducing the net sale price - contention of the department is that the deduction of quantity discount cannot be allowed, as the same was not mentioned in the Central Excise invoices issued at the time of clearance from the factory – Held that:- in the case of UOI vs. Madras Rubber Factory (1995 - TMI - 44005 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) deduction of trade discounts known and understood at the time of removal of goods is permissible even if the same are quantified later and in para 58 and 60 of the judgement with regard to 'turnover discount' has held that though the turnover discount is determined on half yearly basis depending upon the volume of purchases made by the dealers, its deductions is permissible as it is known and understood at the time of removal of the goods, though it is quantified later, matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority for denovo adjudication in accordance with the ratio of judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Madras Rubber Factory, appeal stand disposed of Issues:1. Whether deduction of quantity discount is permissible in Central Excise duty calculation.2. Whether quantity discount must be mentioned in Central Excise invoices issued at the time of clearance from the factory.3. Whether the refund claim is hit by the bar of unjust enrichment.Analysis:Issue 1:The appellant provided quantity discounts to customers under their discount schemes, where a certain quantity of goods was offered free based on the purchased quantity. The department argued that the deduction of quantity discount should have been mentioned in the Central Excise invoices issued at the time of clearance from the factory. However, the Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in a similar case and held that deductions for known and understood trade discounts at the time of removal of goods are permissible, even if quantified later. The Tribunal found that the quantity discount schemes were known and understood at the time of sale from the depot, therefore allowing the deduction of quantity discount in the Central Excise duty calculation.Issue 2:The department contended that the quantity discount should have been mentioned in the Central Excise invoices issued at the time of clearance from the factory. The Tribunal clarified that since the goods were first transferred to the depot and then sold, it was not feasible to include the quantity discount in the factory clearance invoices. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that what should be known and understood prior to sale is the quantity discount scheme or policy, not the exact quantum of discount available to a buyer. Therefore, the absence of quantity discount in the factory clearance invoices did not invalidate the deduction of quantity discount in this case.Issue 3:The department raised concerns regarding the refund claim's unjust enrichment. The Tribunal directed the original adjudicating authority to determine whether there was a quantity discount policy during the dispute period and if the discounts given to customers were in line with the policy. Additionally, the authority was instructed to consider the aspect of unjust enrichment, especially if duty had been collected for the free supply quantity. The Tribunal highlighted that the appellant's claim that free quantity was cleared on payment of duty from the factory needed to be examined.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication in line with the Supreme Court's judgment. The original authority was tasked with assessing the existence of the quantity discount policy, ensuring compliance with the policy, and addressing the unjust enrichment concerns related to the refund claim.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found