Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Crompton Greaves Ltd. Versus Commnr. of Central Excise, Aurangabad

2015 (5) TMI 627 - SUPREME COURT

Valuation - Captive consumption - price shown for various models of VIT cleared for captive consumption of the appellant's own unit at Nasik is much lesser than the price at which the appellant had been selling such products to the other parties - Held that:- In the chart the quantity which was cleared by the appellant for its Nasik unit for the year 1997 is shown in tabulated form in respect of second and fourth model. Insofar as VIT model WL-34599 C-I is concerned, we find that the goods which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2,500/- during 1997-1998, 1998-1999, 1999-2000 and ₹ 11,400/- for the year 2000-2001. This is almost comparable price at which the goods were cleared for its Nasik unit. Therefore, in respect of this model the goods which were cleared by the appellant for its Nasik unit should have been accepted and the price could not have been fixed at ₹ 22,650/-. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Civil Appeal No. 7853 of 2004 - Dated:- 5-5-2015 - A. K. Sikri And Rohinton Fali Nariman,JJ. F .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

parties in the open market and also cleared by the appellant as well for its own unit at Nasik for captive consumption. The appellant has been paying central excise duty for the goods cleared for its Nasik unit. The Revenue/Department found that the price shown for various models of VIT cleared for captive consumption of the appellant's own unit at Nasik is much lesser than the price at which the appellant had been selling such products to the other parties. This resulted in issuance of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Nasik unit should be accepted. The Assessing Officer rejected the aforesaid plea of the appellant and confirmed the demand raised in the show cause notice. The rejection was on the ground that Nasik unit was to be treated as "related party", such price as declared cannot be taken into consideration in view of the provision of Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. For the purpose of valuation the adjudicating authority resorted to the Valuation Rules. He took into considerati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder of the adjudicating authority was challenged by the appellant by filing appeal before the Tribunal. Here also the main contention of the appellant was that the goods which were cleared by the Aurangabad unit for its Nasik unit were at negotiated price and that a price should have been taken into consideration even if the goods were to the related parties. We find that this aspect has been dealt with in detail by the Tribunal and it has given valid reason in the impugned order while rejectin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version