TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the value of clearances of motor vehicle bodies, branded goods and other excisable goods was includible in the aggregate value for determining eligibility to small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE, and whether the duty demand was sustainable.
Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the respondent had cleared body-built motor vehicle bodies bearing the TATA brand name to the Regional Sales Office of TATA Motors were not effectively challenged. It was further recorded that the value of branded motor vehicle bodies was not includible for computing the aggregate value of first clearances of specified goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) also found that the value of all excisable goods cleared other than branded goods up to 28.4.2004 remained within the exemption limit, with the aggregate coming to Rs. 10,40,542/-. In the absence of any sustainable challenge to these findings, no ground existed to interfere with the appellate order.
Conclusion: The value of the disputed clearances was not liable to be included so as to deny the exemption, and the demand was not sustainable.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the order granting relief to the assessee was maintained.
Ratio Decidendi: For SSI exemption, clearances not properly includible in the aggregate turnover cannot be used to deny the benefit, and an unchallenged factual finding that the turnover remained within the exemption limit will sustain deletion of the demand.
TaxTMI 
