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 →

M/s. Rewa Fans Industries And M/s. Ravi Marketing (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal

Determination of correct assessable value - Inclusion of commission paid and discounts given - Whether for the period prior to 1.7.2000 when the price on which the goods are generally sold is the correct assessable value or not - Held that:- As the issue has been settled by Hon ble Apex Court in the decision of Elgi Equipments Ltd. (2007 (8) TMI 20 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA), therefore we hold that price at which goods have been ultimately sold to M/s. PDV shall be the assessable value. In these .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

MPL. As M/s. RMPL is an artificial person and in the facts of circumstances of the case, malafides against M/s. RMPL are not stand proved as they have conceded that the price at which M/s. RMPL sold the goods to M/s. PDV is the correct assessable value. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. 1928 -1929 of 2006 - FINAL ORDER NO. A/ 52413-52414/2015-EX(DB) - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. B Ravichandran, Member (Technical) For the Petitioner : Shri R .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t M/s. RFI are the manufacturer of fans and during the period January 1986 to August, 1987, 95% of their production was sold to their selling distributor i.e. M/s. P D Vyas & Co. (in short PDV). Some remaining sales were effected by the appellant direct to the customers through M/s. PDV for which certain commissions were given to M/s. PDV. The commission given to M/s. PDV was deducted from the assessable value. Revenue is of the view that commission given to M/s. PDV is includable in the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of M/s. PDV. The appellant discharged duty on the price charged to SBE. 4. In these set of facts, a show cause notice was issued to the appellants alleging that M/s. PDV acted as appellants commission agent, therefore the assessable value will be the price at which M/s. PDV sold the fans to whole seller. For determination of the assessable value, the goods cleared through M/s. SBE, thus, alleged to be dummy entrepreneur as they are related parties. Therefore, it was alleged that appellants has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r wherein it was observed that 95% of the fans were sold to M/s. PDV and also M/s. PDV was commission agent to the appellant. It was observed by this Tribunal that these two assertions cannot be simultaneously possible. Thereafter, the impugned orders have been passed wherein the demands proposed in the show cause notice were confirmed. On appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals), he held that the adjudicating authority has misread the contract and has erred in coming to the conclusion that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

5. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that for the period prior to 1.7.2000, there was no concept of transaction value. During that period, the price at which the goods were generally sold is the assessable value and it is admitted fact that 95% of the production was sold to M/s. PDV as sole distributor at a certain price. Therefore, the price at which the goods have been sold to M/s. PDV is the assessable value. In that circumstances, the demand pertained to January, 1986 to August, 198 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted person therefore, the goods at which RMPL sold the goods to M/s. PDV should be the assessable value. In these circumstances, he prayed that the appeal be allowed. For imposition of penalty on M/s. RMPL, he submits that in the impugned order, the penalty could have been imposed on real person and not on artificial person, therefore, the penalty is not imposable. 7. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the finding of the impugned order. 8. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 9. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

normal price which was the wholesale price at the factory gate. The word ordinarily in Section 4(1)(a) indicated that if the sale pattern adopted by an assessee indicated that a large part of the total production was sold at wholesale price at the factory gate and that the assessee had given the benefit of trade discount to large number of its dealers at a particular rate, then, it would constitute normal practice of the wholesale trade in which event the assessee would be entitled to trade di .....

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