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 assessee had proved the quantum of deduction or abatement claimed from the wholesale price on account of freight and rent on containers.
Analysis: The admissibility of deduction for rent on containers and freight was not in dispute; the controversy was confined to the extent of deduction claimed. In such cases, the assessee claiming abatement bears the burden of producing the necessary data, books of accounts, invoices, and certificates to establish the basis and extent of the claim. The record did not show the basis on which rent on containers was computed, when it became chargeable, the rate at which it was chargeable, or whether it was reflected in the invoices. On freight, part of the sales was ex-factory and part from depots, but no reliable evidence was led to justify the amount claimed as actual freight. The findings allowing the full claim were therefore unsupported by material evidence.
Conclusion: The assessee had not established the quantum of deduction claimed for freight and rent on containers, and the matter had to be remitted for fresh determination of the allowable abatement in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Where deduction from assessable value is claimed, the claimant must substantiate the quantum with reliable records and evidence; in the absence of such proof, the claimed abatement cannot be accepted as such and may be remitted for proper determination.