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>Exclusion of Equalized Freight from Assessable Value Upheld by Tribunal</h1> The Tribunal concluded that equalized freight separately charged should not be included in the assessable value for sales on FOR destination basis. The ... Valuation of goods - Inclusion of freight charges - Whether equalized freight separately charged to be included in the assessable value in case of sale on FOR destination basis for the period from July, 2000 to February, 2003 - Held that:- cost of transportation from the place of removal to the place of delivery cannot be included in the assessable value even though cost of transportation has been calculated on average basis and not on actual basis. Same finding was reflected by the Tribunal in the case of Majestic Auto Ltd. cited [2003 (6) TMI 114 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI]. We have also perused board's circular wherein it has been stated that the deductions are permissible only for the actual cost so collected from his buyers - Decided against Revenue. Issues:1. Whether equalized freight separately charged should be included in the assessable value in case of sale on FOR destination basis.2. Interpretation of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 5 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable goods) Rules, 2000.3. Application of Board's circular F.No.354/1/2008-TRU dated 30.6.2008.4. Relevance of previous judgments by the Tribunal and the Supreme Court on inclusion of freight charges in the assessable value.Issue 1: Equalized Freight in Assessable ValueThe case involved a dispute where the Revenue challenged the dropping of demand by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the inclusion of equalized freight in the assessable value for sales on FOR destination basis. The appellants had charged separate freight but did not include it in the invoices. The Revenue contended that this freight should have been part of the assessable value, leading to demands of Central Excise duty. The Tribunal examined the facts and relevant provisions to determine if the equalized freight should be included in the assessable value.Issue 2: Interpretation of Relevant LawsThe department raised grounds of appeal questioning the application of Section 4(1)(a) and Rule 5 of Central Excise Valuation Rules. They argued that the exclusion of transportation cost under Rule 5 was conditional and not absolute, emphasizing that the equalized freight was not the actual transportation cost. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions, previous judgments, and the Board's circular to ascertain whether the equalized freight could be deducted from the assessable value as per the law.Issue 3: Application of Board's CircularThe department cited a Board's circular stating that deductions for transportation costs were permissible only for the actual cost collected from buyers. However, the Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's judgment in a similar case and a previous Tribunal ruling to support the deduction of equalized freight. The Tribunal considered the circular alongside legal precedents to determine the validity of including equalized freight in the assessable value.Issue 4: Precedents and Legal InterpretationThe Tribunal referred to previous judgments by the Supreme Court and the Tribunal to support its decision. Specifically, the Tribunal highlighted the Supreme Court's ruling that transportation cost from the place of removal to delivery cannot be included in the assessable value, even if calculated on an average basis. The Tribunal also cited its own judgment, aligning with the Supreme Court's decision, to reject the department's appeal. By relying on legal precedents and interpretations, the Tribunal concluded that the equalized freight should not be included in the assessable value, thereby dismissing the department's appeal.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by the parties, the interpretation of relevant legal provisions, and the application of precedents to reach a conclusive decision in favor of the respondent.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found