TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Supreme Court clarifies excise duty recovery rules on boiler parts classification</h1> <h3>M/s. Thermax Babcock And Wilcox Ltd. Versus Commnr. of Central Excise, Pune</h3> The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the assessee/appellant regarding the classification of pressure and non-pressure parts cleared from the factory. The ... Valuation - whether the value of bought out items should be added to the assessable value of the boilers - assessee had removed boilers in unassembled form at the factory site according to the excise authorities - Held that:- If there was no such amount demanded in the show cause notice, the direction contained in para 10 and 11(b) of the impugned order of the Tribunal to the jurisdictional officer to determine and recover the duty from the appellant shall have to go. However, it is only if the Officer is satisfied that no demand was made in respect of aforesaid items while computing the demand - Decided against assessee. Issues: Classification of pressure and non-pressure parts cleared from the factory, Value of bought out items in relation to the assessable value of boilers.In the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court, the first issue concerned the classification of pressure and non-pressure parts cleared from the factory. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee/appellant, and no appeal was filed by the Department against this decision. Moving on to the second issue, it revolved around the value of bought out items and whether their value should be included in the assessable value of boilers. The Tribunal sided with the Revenue, stating that these parts were essential for the functioning of a boiler. However, the appellant pointed out discrepancies in the show cause notice, where although the bought out parts were mentioned, no excise duty was demanded on them. Consequently, the Court clarified that if no duty was demanded in the show cause notice, the direction in the Tribunal's order to determine and recover duty from the appellant would not apply. The appeals were ultimately dismissed, with the condition that the duty must have been demanded for the jurisdictional officer to proceed with determining and recovering it from the appellant.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
