TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the operation of impugned order confirming the duty of Rs. 1,87,657/- alongwith interest and equivalent amount of penalty in the order-in-original against the applicant. 2. The issue involved is whether the applicant is liable to pay duty on the transaction value as per the provisions of Section 4(3)(d) of Central Excise Act, 1944 or not. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. 4. On scrutiny of the financial records of the applicant, it was revealed that the applicant has received an abatement of Rs. 11,49,856/- on account of pre-mature repayment of Sales Tax liability accrued during the year 2004-05 at Net Present Value (NPV). The difference between the actual sales tax collected from the customers and payment made at NPV was shown as deferral sales tax incentive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cant has not opted for availment of benefit of the said scheme of the Government of Maharashtra, the applicant had to deposit the full sales tax collected by him. 7. On the other hand, the ld. JDR argued that this abatement of sales tax confirms the part of transaction value and the applicant is having the duty liability. 8. After going into the facts and circumstances of the case, we find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
