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 escalated price received in advance under a rate contract was to be included in the financial year of receipt for computing the aggregate value of clearances under Notification No. 77/83-C.E., or whether the computation had to be linked to the date of actual removal of the goods.
Analysis: The rate contract provided for a basic price and also for escalation linked to changes in the price of raw materials. On that basis, the escalated amount could be billed and received before actual clearance of the consignment, but the duty liability under the excise scheme continued to arise with reference to removal from the factory. The relevant accounting for the notification therefore had to follow the date of clearance and not the mere date on which the basic or escalated amount was received. The lower authorities' view that escalation could never be treated as advance receipt was not accepted in light of the contractual arrangement.
Conclusion: The aggregate value of clearances had to be reckoned with reference to the date of actual removal of the goods, and the escalated price received in advance could not be forced into the year of receipt for the purpose of denying the benefit of the notification.
Ratio Decidendi: For excise exemption based on aggregate clearances, the controlling event is the date of removal of the goods, and advance receipt of the sale price or escalated price does not alter the year in which the clearance is to be counted.