Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2017 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1111 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTRestoration of appeal - Sale - presumption u/s 12B of the Act - the impugned order holds that the presumption u/s 12B of the Act is not applicable as the department has no evidence to prove that the appellant has passed on incidence of duty to any other person - Held that: - the definition of 'sale' in Section 2(h) is transfer of possession from one person to another for consideration. In this case, the job work is performed by Unit II of respondent/assessee for its customers on goods received from its customers. After carrying out the process, the goods are again handed over possession of to customers. Therefore, it would be a 'sale' within the meaning of the Act. The person receiving possession of goods back would be similar to the person purchasing goods and would be covered by commonly understood word 'buyer' in terms of Section 12B of the Act. The burden would be upon the respondent/assessee to rebut the presumption that the incidence of duty paid on welding electrodes has not been passed on to its customers - the impugned order of the Tribunal is unsustainable. The issue restored to the Assessing Officer to enable the respondent/assess to rebut the presumption u/s.12B of the Act in respect of duty paid on welding electrodes - appeal allowed being restored.
|