TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether automobile cess could be demanded from an independent body builder manufacturing bus bodies on duty-paid chassis, notwithstanding Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and the clarification in CBEC Circular No. 41/88 dated 31.08.1988.
Analysis: The levy was examined in the light of the statutory scheme under the Automobile Cess Rules, 1984 and the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, together with the departmental circular clarifying that cess was intended to be collected from vehicle manufacturers and not from body builders. The circular further clarified that no cess should be levied again where the body is built by an independent body builder on chassis on which cess has already been paid. The later position under Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 87, treating body-building as manufacture for excise purposes, was held not to authorise a fresh levy of automobile cess on the body builder where the Ministry's clarification remained unwithdrawn.
Conclusion: Automobile cess was not leviable on the appellant as an independent body builder, and the demand, interest and penalty were set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a valid and unwithdrawn departmental clarification restricts automobile cess to vehicle manufacturers, cess cannot be demanded again from an independent body builder on the same chassis merely because body-building is treated as manufacture under excise law.
TaxTMI 
