Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1999 (11) TMI 900

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pellants do not wish to press their claim for deductions on account of purchase tax before us, which had been denied in the Order-in-Appeal impugned. Therefore, the only matter before us with respect to deduction from the cumulative price of interest on sundry debtors. He submits that the matter under consideration is no longer res integral as it has already been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of MRF Ltd v. UOI as in MANU/SC/0294/1986 read with Hon'ble Apex Court's judgment in view of recalling this decision as in MANU/SC/0725/1995. Ld. Advocate submits that both in the initial judgment as well as the later recalled judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has consistently held that interest on sundry debtors is de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sed. The cost is incurred only where credit terms are given in case of up-country and other buyers where payment is made much after the sales are effected. They contend that it is nothing but an extension of the principle underlying Rule 4 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules. They contend that this is an adjustment in value required to be made to take into account and provide for the difference in the time of delivery and the realisation of the sale value. As stated in our judgment in Union of India and Ors. v. Bombay Tyres International Ltd. (supra), it is only those expenses incurred on account of factors which have contributed to its value upto the date of sale or the date of delivery which are liable to be included in the assessable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is read with the findings and decision of the Apex Court in para-66 of the recalled judgment, it is crystal clear that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had considered a situation where the cost pertaining to interest on such sundry debtors had been inbuilt in the price of the goods. Therefore, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in coming to a conclusion that such inbuilt cost amounted to claiming an abatement, which issue was not considered in the MRF judgment. On the contrary, the Ld. Advocate submits, this very issue was considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in MRF case (supra). Therefore, the Order-in-Appeal clearly suffers from non-application of mind insofar as this issue is concerned. 6. Ld. Advocate further submits that as f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty after taking into consideration the deductions to which each assessee would be entitled in the light of the decision of this Court dated 8.5.1995. If at the end of the exercise it is found that the assessee is entitled to a refund the question whether the amount is refundable in view of Section 11B of the Central Excise and Salt Act would have to be determined by the said authority. 7. Ld. DR reiterates the Order-in-Original but has no objection to the recomputation of the duties involved at the original level as the same cannot be done by the department. He submits that as held in the Order-in-Appeal impugned, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has clearly held therein that later payments of the prices of the goods by the buyer by itself .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that such a deduction was admissible under the Act. 9. We find that as against this the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded that this element when in-built in the price and claimed as a deduction to be in the nature of an abatement and as therefore concluded that such a claim for abatement was not considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the MRF case supra. We find that this conclusion is erroneous and has perhaps reached without reading the para-16 of the original judgment of the Supreme Court and para-66 of the judgment on recall of the Supreme Court noted above. We have already held that such an inbuilt cost on this account of interest on sundry debtors was clearly considered as dedu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates