2015 (7) TMI 1118

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llected by the appellant could not be claimed as a deduction from the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and raised the demand of duty, penalty, interest etc. for the periods April,1997 to April,1998 and April,1997 to March, 1998. This resulted in passing of the order dated 08.01.1999 by the Adjudicating Authority holding that Dharmada collected by the appellant was used only for charitable purposes and hence the said charges were not trading receipts and, therefore, could not be included in the assessable value. Consequently, he dropped the entire demand raised by the said show cause notices. However, in the meantime, the Superintendents had again issued show cause notice....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal of the Department and held that Dharmada collected by the appellant would form a part of transaction value for the sale of goods. Aggrieved, the appellant went in appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), which vide its impugned order and judgment dated 06.01.2005, partly allowed the appeal, holding that the duty amount needs to be recalculated by treating the prices charged in the invoices as cum-duty-price and by applying correct rate of duty, however, rejecting the appellant's contention that Dharmada should not form a part of transaction value of the goods under the amended Section 4 of the Act. From the aforesaid, it is clear that the issue as to whether ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....various schemes or for the expenditure incurred towards discharge of Committee's functions etc. Two questions were raised before this Court in that case. First, whether the surcharge in that case could be regarded as a "tax" so that it could be deducted as "other taxes" from the normal price under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) and, secondly, whether the surcharge being a compulsory impost, could be considered as part of price on which excise duty was chargeable. The Court on an analysis of the statutory provisions of the Steel Control order came to the conclusion that the surcharge could not be regarded as a tax and was part of the price as under the statutory provisions the Committee was entitled to fix the price and other charges in addition o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the receipts of surcharge are receipts charged as part of price under a Notification issued under the Iron and Steel(Control) Order, 1956 (under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955). iii) Whereas payment of Dharmada was optional, the payment of such surcharge was made a part of the invoice and was mandatory. iv) Whereas by collecting Dharmada, the Assesses were merely acting as conduits or clearing houses for passing the amounts collected as Dharmada, the money so collected as Dharmada was to be used for charitable purposes only, in the case of surcharge levied by the steel plants, even though the surcharge went to the Committee it was ultimately used for the benefit of the plants and the development as a whole of the business of manu....