TaxTMI Login
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%
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
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the appellants were entitled to small scale exemption in view of the value of investment on plant and machinery; (ii) whether packing and forwarding charges were includible in the assessable value; (iii) whether duty was payable on goods cleared without gate passes and without accountal in statutory records; and (iv) whether the sale price had to be treated as cum-duty price.
Issue (i): Whether the appellants were entitled to small scale exemption in view of the value of investment on plant and machinery.
Analysis: The balance sheet and chartered accountant's certificate showed investment in plant and machinery in excess of the Rs. 20 lakhs ceiling. The explanation that the higher figure was not supported by the record was not accepted, and the exemption limit was held to have been crossed. The duty, however, had to be recomputed by applying the slab structure under the amended exemption notification.
Conclusion: The appellants were not entitled to the small scale exemption and were liable to duty, subject to redetermination under the amended notification.
Issue (ii): Whether packing and forwarding charges were includible in the assessable value.
Analysis: There was no satisfactory basis to hold that the goods were normally sold in packed condition, and the record did not show that the goods necessarily required packing for sale. On the facts, packing was treated as special packing and the related charges could not form part of the assessable value.
Conclusion: Packing and forwarding charges were not includible in the assessable value.
Issue (iii): Whether duty was payable on goods cleared without gate passes and without accountal in statutory records.
Analysis: The plea that the goods were merely returned for repairs or reconditioning was not accepted because the prescribed procedure for bringing back excisable goods had not been followed and no proper co-relation was established between the documents and the disputed clearances. The finding of duty liability on such clearances was therefore sustained.
Conclusion: Duty was payable on the clearances made without gate passes and without accountal in statutory records.
Issue (iv): Whether the sale price had to be treated as cum-duty price.
Analysis: Since duty had not been separately collected and only the price had been realised, the total realised amount had to be treated as inclusive of duty and the assessable value had to be recomputed by deducting the duty element.
Conclusion: The sale price had to be treated as cum-duty price and the duty demand required recomputation.
Final Conclusion: The demand was sustained on the issues of exemption and clandestine clearances, but the assessable value had to be reduced by excluding packing charges and by treating the realised price as inclusive of duty, with the duty liability to be reworked by the adjudicating authority.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory exemption threshold for plant and machinery is crossed, exemption is unavailable; special packing charges are not includible in assessable value when the goods are otherwise marketable without such packing; and where duty is not separately charged, the realised price is to be treated as cum-duty price for recomputation.
TaxTMI 
