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 a physically handicapped purchaser of a motor car fitted with auto-transmission was entitled to exemption from excise duty and refund of duty paid, despite the disability being in the right leg rather than the left leg.
Analysis: The certificate issued by the competent department established that the petitioner was a physically handicapped person and that the vehicle was capable of being driven by him for the purpose of availing concessional excise duty under the applicable exemption notification. The departmental clarification stated that concessional duty was not to be denied to any motor vehicle with special features, such as auto-transmission, when purchased by a physically handicapped person producing the necessary certificate. The distinction drawn by the department between disability in the right leg and disability in the left leg had no basis in the policy or the clarification and was treated as arbitrary and unsustainable.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to exemption from excise duty and refund of the duty paid, and the impugned order rejecting the claim was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the exemption policy grants concessional excise duty to physically handicapped persons purchasing a vehicle suitable for their disability and the prescribed certificate is produced, the benefit cannot be denied on an artificial distinction as to the particular limb affected.