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. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. Versus CCE, Delhi-III

2016 (8) TMI 579 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

Valuation - paper reels sent from factory to cutting centres for conversion into sheets - sold from the depot - whether the freight and insurance charges from factory to cutting centres and handling charges at the cutting centres must be included on the assessable value - Held that:- the same issue has been decided by the Tribunal in the appellant's own case [2011 (4) TMI 800 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] by relying on the decision of Hob'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. J.G. Glass Indust .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d for charging duty and the cost of transportation and insurance from factory gate to the cutting would not be includable in the assessable value. - Decided in favour of appellant - E/1219/2012-EX(DB) - Final Order No. 263/2016-CHD - Dated:- 16-12-2015 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri B.L. Narsimhan, Advocate- for the appellant Shri M. R. Sharma, A.R. - for the respondent ORDER The appellant are engaged in the manufacture of paper and paper board charge .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch after being cut into sheets had been sold from the depot. The department s contention is that in respect of the reels cleared to cutting centres for conversion into sheets and which were subsequently sold from depot, the freight and insurance charges from factory to cutting centres and handling charges at the cutting centres must be included on the assessable value. It is on this basis of show cause notices were issued to the appellant from time to time for the period from November 2003 to De .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

have been filed. 2. Heard both the sides in respect of stay application. 3. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant has pleaded that the same issue came up before the Tribunal in respect of earlier period in the appellant s own case, wherein the Tribunal rejected the plea of the department. That matter was challenged by the department in the Hon ble Supreme Court. Because of pendency of the appeal against that order in the Hon ble Supreme Court, the adjudication of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mits that aforesaid approach adopted by the adjudicating Authority is untenable and accordingly the impugned order is not sustainable. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant had pleaded before the Commissioner (appeals) that his case was covered by the earlier order of CESTAT which was confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in as much as the civil appeal was dismissed, but he Appellate Authority ignored said plea and the impugned order is totally silent on the aforesaid aspect 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

 

 

 

 

 

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