Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (4) TMI 288 - SUPREME COURT

2016 (4) TMI 288 - SUPREME COURT - 2016 (334) E.L.T. 580 (SC) - Inclusion of value of gunny bags for determination of assessable value of manufactured goods - Arrangement between appellant and buyers of soda ash - Held that:- if an arrangement exists between the seller and the buyer of excisable goods for return of the packing materials by the buyer to the seller, carrying an obligation on the seller to return the value of the packing materials to the buyer on such return, such value is not liab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e gunny bags to the Buyer in terms of any arrangement between the parties not found. - Value to be included - Decided against the assessee. - Civil Appeal Nos. 7251-7302 of 2000 - Dated:- 1-4-2016 - Ranjan Gogoi, Arun Mishra And Prafulla C. Pant, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Ravinder Narain, Adv. Ms. Mallika Joshi, Adv. Ms. Ruchika, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain,Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. K. Radhakrishna, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. Jitin Singhal,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Pra .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ss Works (P) Ltd. V. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay 1988 (Supp) SCC 601 and Triveni Glass Ltd. V. Union of India & Ors. (2005) 3 SCC 484. 2. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of Mahalakshmi Glass Works (P) Ltd.(supra) may be conveniently extracted herein under: 5. The Tribunal noted that the appellant manufactured glass bottles. It delivered these in two types of packing, namely, in open crates and in cartons and gunny bags. So far as the crates were concerned, the same belonged to the appellant. 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

he customer along with the cost of glass bottles. The appellant s case was that these packings were also returnable and in many cases they were actually returned and reused by the appellant. There was no evidence about the durability of the cartons and gunny bags but nothing to show that these were returnable. The position seems to be as follows: The Tribunal has rightly applied the returnability test. In K. Radha Krishnaiah v. Inspector of Central Excise this Court observed that it cannot be sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and gunny bags. The appellant invited the attention of the Tribunal to the following clause in their standard contract. It read as follows: 6. All packing cases, other than such as may be supplied or paid for by buyer, shall be returnable in good order and condition within 30 days after receipt. 6. The Tribunal was of the view that the above clause related to cases . It could have meant only the crates which belonged to the appellant and for which the customers had not paid anything. The propert .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al course of business anyone could be asked to part with his property, and in addition incur return freight therefor too for nothing. In those circumstances, the Tribunal held that the cartons and gunny bags were not returnable in the accepted sense of the term. The Tribunal further noted that since the statute insisted on the packing being returnable, in addition to being durable, the authorities are bound to see whether the transaction fulfilled the tests of returnability as per the Supreme Co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not the physical capability of the packing to be returned which is the determining factor but the condition that if the buyer chooses to return the packing the seller is obliged to accept it and refund the stipulated amount. It is held that the question whether the packing is actually returned or not has no relevance. 17. We have considered the submission of the parties. In our view, the law laid down by this Court in Mahalakshmi Glass Works (P) Ltd. is the correct law. There is no necessity tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nks are returned to the appellants, the appellants would be in a position to use them again. In our view, the High Court was wrong in holding that the wooden crates are not durable or returnable. The answer to the second question therefore has to be in favour of the appellants. It is held that, in view of the specific term in the bills/invoices, the wooden crates are durable and returnable packing whose cost is not to be included in the value of glass sheets. 4. From the above what transpires is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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