Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (11) TMI 301

..... buyers’ premises? - HELD THAT:- The facts show that freight and insurance charges are separately quoted in purchase orders and price of goods is agreed to be Ex-Works price - The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Ispat Industries Limited [2015 (10) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT] has considered the very same issue and held that the buyers’ premises can never be the place of removal. The issue is settled in favor of the assessee and the freight and insurance charges is not required to be included in the assessable value - The demand of duty by including freight and insurance charges cannot sustain - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Central Excise Appeal No. 23/2012 - A/31022/2019 - 5-11-2019 - HON BLE MS. SULE .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... /Ex-factory price and the excise duty and VAT amount is also calculated on such price. The representative of the buyer visits the factory and satisfies about the goods and permits to dispatch the goods to various destinations for separate consideration specified in purchase order. Once the transformers are handed over to the carrier/transporter, it is as good as delivery to the buyer in terms of Section 39 of the sale of goods Act. Thus, the place of sale is the factory gate. The assessable value is Ex-factory mentioned in the purchase order and the payment of excise duty on Exworks/ Ex-factory price is in accordance with the provisions of Section 4(1)(a) of Central Excise Act, 1944. He argued that the place of removal is the factory gate e .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... en referred and distinguished. 7. The Tribunal in the case of M/s KJV Alloy Conductors Pvt. Ltd. and others (supra) had considered the issue in detail and observed as under: In the case of Ispat Industries Limited, it was held that the buyers premises can never ever be a place of removal. Although the case pertained to the period before the amendment to Section 4 as above, the Hon ble Apex Court has discussed the issue both prior to its amendment and after it, in para 16 of its judgment as discussed above. It has been held that if the intention was to cover the expenses up to the place where the goods have been sold, the Section would have said so but the expression is goods are to be sold . Therefore, the place of removal is before the goo .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

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

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||