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 the delay of 93 days in filing the revision should be condoned. (ii) Whether the earlier view on inclusion of Mandi Shulk in sale price under the relevant VAT definition required reconsideration by a larger Bench.
Issue (i): Whether the delay of 93 days in filing the revision should be condoned.
Analysis: The revision was accompanied by an application explaining the short delay, and the Court found that the revision raised a question requiring determination. On that basis, the delay application was allowed.
Conclusion: The delay of 93 days was condoned.
Issue (ii): Whether the earlier view on inclusion of Mandi Shulk in sale price under the relevant VAT definition required reconsideration by a larger Bench.
Analysis: The Court noted that the definition of sale price under Section 2(42) included valuable consideration and also sums such as excise duty, special excise duty, or any other duty or tax. It expressed doubt about the earlier Division Bench view excluding Mandi Shulk, and held that the question warranted reconsideration by a larger Bench.
Conclusion: The earlier Division Bench judgment was referred for fresh consideration by a larger Bench.
Final Conclusion: The revision was entertained, but the substantive controversy on inclusion of Mandi Shulk in sale price was not finally decided and was placed before a larger Bench for determination.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the Court finds a prior view on the tax treatment of an amount under the statutory definition of sale price to be doubtful, it may refer the matter to a larger Bench for reconsideration.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
