TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal rules in favor of assessee on exemptions denial, overturns unjustified deductions.</h1> <h3>HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAJKOT</h3> HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAJKOT - 1999 (113) E.L.T. 650 (Tribunal) Issues: Denial of exemptions in calculating assessable value - Turnover tax, sales tax, equalised freight deductions; Quantity discount denial; Bank charges deduction denial; Discount on damages denial.The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai dealt with multiple issues arising from the denial of exemptions claimed by the assessee in calculating the assessable value of their products. The first issue revolved around the disallowance of deductions for turnover tax, sales tax, and equalised freight by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the failure of the assessees to show actual payments made towards these items, specifically concerning the Rajkot unit. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments and the Board's approval of calculating freight on an equalised basis, concluding that the denial of these deductions was not justified based on the established legal principles.Another issue addressed was the denial of quantity discount claimed by the assessee. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the denial citing specific requirements for mentioning discounts in the price list. However, the Tribunal found that the buyers were aware of the claimable discount during the relevant period, thus disagreeing with the denial based on the price list technicality.The judgment also discussed the denial of deductions for bank charges for collection of sale proceeds, which the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed despite similarities to interest on receivables. The Tribunal noted that in a previous case involving the same assessee, bank charges were permitted as a deduction, leading to the conclusion that the denial in the present case was unfounded.Lastly, the denial of a discount on damages suffered during transit was addressed. While the reason for denial was unclear in the Commissioner's order, the Tribunal referred to a previous order in the assessee's case where the excludibility of discount on damages was accepted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order on all counts, allowing the appeals with consequential relief for the appellants.
TaxTMI 