TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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: (i) Whether licence fee paid to the foreign supplier for imported recorded media was includible in the assessable value; (ii) whether the demand was barred by limitation and the extended period could be invoked.
Issue (i): Whether licence fee paid to the foreign supplier for imported recorded media was includible in the assessable value.
Analysis: The dispute on valuation was already covered against the assessee by the cited tribunal ruling, which treated licence fee paid before importation as part of the transaction value where it formed a condition of sale. The assessable value was therefore liable to include such licence fee under the valuation rule invoked.
Conclusion: This issue was decided against the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the demand was barred by limitation and the extended period could be invoked.
Analysis: The tribunal held that where the valuation issue itself had earlier witnessed a difference of opinion and was referred to a third member, the extended period was not invocable on the same set of facts. As the demand related entirely to a period beyond the normal limitation period, it was time-barred.
Conclusion: This issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The demand was set aside as time-barred and the appeals were allowed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the core valuation dispute had earlier been the subject of conflicting views within the tribunal on substantially similar facts, the extended period of limitation could not be invoked and a demand confined to the extended period was barred by time.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
