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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to recover excise duty at 18% or 16% in respect of goods dispatched before the rate reduction, and whether the contractual clauses governing ex-factory pricing and revision of statutory levies permitted the purchaser to insist on the reduced rate for such goods.
Analysis: The tender required prices to be quoted ex-factory with excise duty shown separately, and the general conditions provided that the supplier would bear risk until delivery while the purchaser could seek reduction in price if statutory levies were revised during the supply period. The reduction in duty from 18% to 16% operated only prospectively and could not be used to reduce the duty component for goods that had already left the petitioner's premises on or before 28-2-1999. Since the petitioner remained liable to pay duty at 18% for such goods, paying a lower duty while receiving the agreed higher contractual amount would create an inequitable result amounting to unjust enrichment.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to recover excise duty at 18% for goods that had left its premises on or before 28-2-1999, subject to furnishing proof of that factual position before the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a contract provides for ex-factory pricing with excise duty shown separately, a subsequent reduction in duty rate does not alter the supplier's entitlement to recover the duty component at the rate applicable when the goods had already left the supplier's premises, especially where a contrary result would cause unjust enrichment.