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. Paramount Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer

2017 (1) TMI 745 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Release of detained goods - Form KK - Form LL - Held that: - What has clearly emerged and to that extent it is conceded, even by the petitioner, is that, in one of the Forms, i.e., Form No.FKK28121600008657019, dated 28.12.2016, the basic price was indicated as ₹ 27,01,648/-. Therefore, the respondent is right in contending, that, inadvertently or deliberately, the value was understated. - There is material on record, which prima facie, does indicate that the subject goods were importe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dealer i.e., SEL. On the fulfilment of the aforesaid conditions, the subject goods will be released to the petitioner. - Petition allowed - decided partly in favor of petitioner. - W.P.No.627 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.682 of 2017 - Dated:- 10-1-2017 - Rajiv Shakdher, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Ramanathan For the Respondent : Mr. K. Venkatesh Govt. Advocate ORDER 1. Issue notice. Mr.K.Venkatesh, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of counsels for the parties, the writ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

behalf, the petitioner had acted, which led to the respondent passing the impugned orders to file a petition. 2.2. I have, however, allowed the prosecution of the Writ Petition, in view of the respondent's own conduct, to which I have made a brief reference hereafter. 2.3. In this behalf, one, notes, that the goods detention notice dated 29.12.2016 has been marked by the respondent only to the driver of the concerned vehicle, while the compounding notice dated 31.12.2016 has been directed, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion are as follows: 3.1 The petitioner i.e., the agent was acting for and behalf of an entity, by the name, SEL, which has one of its offices located at Thiruvandarkoil, Pondicherry-605 107. 3.2. It is the petitioner's case that the principal i.e., SEL had imported parts of wind operated electricity generators, which are known as Hub Body, and that, in the course of movement of goods from the Chennai Port to Pondicherry, they were detained by the respondent. 3.3. Furthermore, the petitioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

19, dated 28.12.2016, pertaining to trailer No.TN28AC9002, inadvertently, the basic price got reflected as ₹ 27,01,648/- as against ₹ 37,01,648/-. The table below will bring to fore the discrepancy, if, one were to compare the basic price given against Serial No.1, with that of which is set out vis-a-vis sernial Nos.2,3 and 4. Sl. No. Form KK No. Date Trailer Basic Price Duty Total 1 FKK28121600008657019 28-12-2016 TN28AC9002 27,01,648 2,85,952 29,87,600 2 FKK2812160000656259 28-12-2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hnology Company Limited, China (in short 'JSL'), dated 24.10.2016. ii) The Commercial Invoice bearing No.16JXMC041, dated 22.11.2016, raised on SEL. iii) The Bill of Entry bearing No.: 7895234, dated 20.12.2016. iv) Exemption Certificate, dated 13.12.2016, issued by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India. v) The relevant Form KK bearing No.FKK28121600008657019, dated 28.12.2016, in which, the discrepancy has, apparently, crept in. 4. As against this, Mr.Venkatesh, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

#8377; 29,87,599.50 as against a sum of ₹ 39,87,599.50. Furthermore, it was submitted that an observation had been made in the impugned order with regard to the identity of the consignment as well. 4.3 This apart, my attention was drawn to the fact that the respondent had also observed in the impugned order that the subject goods were not covered in the declaration made in Form M M by the driver, as required under Rule 15(19)(b) of TNVAT Rules, 2007. 4.4 Mr.Venkatesh, thus, submitted 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

as understated. 7. This apart, there is material on record, which prima facie, does indicate that the subject goods were imported by SEL from JSL and that, in respect of the subject goods, a certificate has been issued by the Government of India, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, granting exemption to SEL from payment of additional duty. 8. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the subject goods were detained, while they were being moved in the course of import, may perhaps, be ri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, the tax qua such goods can be levied only at the rate of 5%. 10.The impugned notice, however, seeks to levy the tax on the entire value of the subject goods i.e., ₹ 39,87,600/-, which includes an element of duty, equivalent to ₹ 2,85,982/-. The tax, in the impugned compounding notice, has been calculated at the rate of 14.5% and is, accordingly, pegged at ₹ 7,07,720/-. In addition thereto, compounding fee has also been levied at twice the rate of tax imposed, i.e., ₹ 14 .....

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