Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2011 (2) TMI 592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erest thereof (c)     Equivalent amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The above referred amount has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority on the ground that the appellant is liable to pay the differential duty as they have availed the benefit of pre-payment of the amount of deferred sales taxes as per the provisions of Maharashtra Sales Tax Act, 1959. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant drew our attention to the order-in-original. It is her submission that an amendment was brought to Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, wherein the appellant were permitted to discharge the entire sales tax lia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x actually paid by the assessee. He drew our attention to the clarification given by the Board that as per definition of "transaction value" taxes are deductible only on actual basis either paid or payable by the assessee. It is his submission that in these cases the assessee is not paid the balance amount of sales tax collected by him from the customer which would they are liable to be included in the transaction value. It is also his submission that the orders and Judgment of the Tribunal in the following cases (a)    Bharat Roll Industry (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CCE, Haldia - 2008 (229) E.L.T. 107 (T). (b)    Eastern Setcrete Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Haldia - 2008 (231) E.L.T. 179 (Tri.). (c)    Modip....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubmissions made at length by both the sides. 7. At the outset we find that it is not in dispute that the amount on which the Revenue wants to collect excise duty is a sales tax collected by the appellant from their customers. It is also not in dispute the amount that has been collected were to be paid to the Government of Maharashtra in a deferred payment of scheme. It is also not in dispute that to the deferred payment scheme, an amendment was introduced to the provisions to Section 38(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 which permitted an assessee to discharge the entire sales tax liability under the deferred payment scheme. We find that the said amendment to Section 38(4) reads as under :- "Provided also that, notwithstanding....