https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17385 The court set aside the assessment orders that included excise duty in the "purchase price" for section 44AC of the Income-tax Act. It emphasized the validity of sections 44AC and 206C, stating they do not replace regular assessments under sections 28 to 43C. The judgment clarified that no tax should be levied on excise duty paid directly to the State Government under section 206C. While acknowledging no conflict between court decisions, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners, noting the assessments disregarded previous rulings. The respondents were allowed further action within the law, and the writ petitions were disposed of accordingly. en-us Mon, 20 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:39:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17385 The court set aside the assessment orders that included excise duty in the "purchase price" for section 44AC of the Income-tax Act. It emphasized the validity of sections 44AC and 206C, stating they do not replace regular assessments under sections 28 to 43C. The judgment clarified that no tax should be levied on excise duty paid directly to the State Government under section 206C. While acknowledging no conflict between court decisions, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners, noting the assessments disregarded previous rulings. The respondents were allowed further action within the law, and the writ petitions were disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17385