Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin

2016 (11) TMI 1205 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Valuation - Benefit of abatement of Sales Tax/VAT on equalized basis - inadmissible deduction - Held that: - both the lower authorities (of Revenue) below held that equalized or average sales tax cannot be allowed for abatement under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act 1944. Further, we find that this issue is no longer res integra in view of the various decisions of the Tribunal in the appellants own case and also the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the appellants own case where it was .....

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 Respondent. ORDER Per : S.S GARG The present appeals are directed against the impugned orders dated 10/12/2007 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order-in-original and denying the benefit of abatement of Sales Tax/VAT on equalized basis. Since the issue in both the appeals is common and therefore both the appeals are disposed of by this common order. The facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of laundry soaps falling under Chapter heading No .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AT has been charged in some States and in other States sales tax at differing percentages is being charged. In view of this factual position, a show-cause notice dated 28.8.2006 was issued proposing to deny the claim for deduction of sales tax and other taxes in excess of 12.5% on the ground that the same is inadmissible deduction and accordingly on the difference in value, duty was demanded. The appellant controverted the allegation in the show-cause notice but the Assistant Commissioner throug .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submitted that there is no material change in the provisions of law i.e. under Section 4(4()(d)(ii) prior to 01.7.2000 and Section 4(3)(d) with effect from 01.07.2000, in so far as the claim of admissible deduction (sales tax/VAT in the instant case) on the basis of actual tax as long as the same does not exceed the amount paid to the State Exchequer. Learned counsel also submitted that once the sales tax is held to be an admissible deduction, it should be allowed even on equalized basis as 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

/C-II dated 16.4.2013 2) Final Order No A/1956/WZB/Mum/05/C-III/EB dated 25.08.2005 3) Final Order No. 40459-40460 dated 24.06.2-2014 and Hon ble Supreme Courts decision in the appellants own case in Civil Appeal D. No. 16121 of 2015 dated 28.08.2015. 3. On the other hand, learned A.R., reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. We have carefully heard the learned counsel for the Appellant and the learned A.R. for the Revenue and perused the records. After considering the submiss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

evant portion of the Final Order dated 24.06.2014 which is reproduced in the order of the Tribunal in the case of the appellant reported in 2015-TIOL-510-CESTAT MAD. "4. It is seen that the Tribunal subsequently vide Final order No. A/361 & 362/13/EB/C-II dt. 16.4.2013 in the appellant's own case set aside the order and allowed the appeal. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below:- 5. This issue came up before this Tribunal in appellant's own case wherein vi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

epted this in principle. He has disallowed the deduction only based on the grounds that the Respondent have claimed the same on a weighted average basis as mentioned earlier. The Commissioner (Appeals) have allowed the deduction without specifically giving a finding on each of the above three grounds raised by the original authority. We are of the considered view that in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the deduction towards additional sales tax and octroi can be allowed on equaliz .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version