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 a demand raised under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be confirmed under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944; and (ii) whether excise duty recovered from customers but not paid to the Government was includible in the assessable value of the excisable goods.
Issue (i): whether a demand raised under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be confirmed under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
Analysis: Section 11A was treated as the provision replacing Rule 10, and the Collector (Appeals) followed earlier judicial authority supporting confirmation of the demand under the new provision. No legal infirmity was found in that approach.
Conclusion: The demand raised under Rule 10 was validly confirmed under Section 11A, against the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether excise duty recovered from customers but not paid to the Government was includible in the assessable value of the excisable goods.
Analysis: The amount recovered from customers towards duty, though not remitted to the Government, was held to form part of the value of the goods and not to be deductible under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
Conclusion: The recovered duty amount was includible in the assessable value, against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The order of the Collector (Appeals) was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed, leaving the revenue's stand undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: A demand validly referable to the substituted recovery provision is enforceable, and duty recovered from buyers but not remitted to the Government forms part of the assessable value unless specifically deductible under the valuation provision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
