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

2023 (12) TMI 1104

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sesses is required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. By relying on the above decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, it is held that the sales tax concession retained by the Appellant is required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty - the demand for the normal period is to be computed by taking the amount collected as cum-duty. Extended period of limitation - penalty - HELD THAT:- It is observed that there were decisions of the Tribunals that the sales tax concession retained by the assesses is not required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. Thus, the appellant cannot be faulted for not includi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri P. K. Ghosh, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER The present appeal has been filed against the impugned Order-in- Original dated 14.10.2019, passed by Commissioner CGST, Shillong, wherein he confirmed the demand of Rs.2,29,447/- including Education Cess and SHE Cess along with interest, for the normal period of limitation and dropped the demand raised by invoking the extended period. However, he imposed penalty of Rs. 2,29,447/- under Section 11AC of the CEA, 1944. He appropriated the pre deposit of Rs.5,12,724/- paid by the Appellant, against the confirmed demand. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the Appellant has filed this appeal. 2. In their grounds of appeal, the Appellant submits that the H .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Synotex (India) Ltd. Vs CCE, Jaipur reported in 2014 (301) ELT 273, wherein it has been held that the sales tax concession retained by the assesses is required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. He also justified the penalty imposed. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. We observe that the adjudicating authority has passed the Order-in- Original 14.10.2019 wherein he confirmed the demand of Rs.2,29,447/- including Education Cess and SHE Cess along with interest, for the normal period of limitation and dropped the demand raised by invoking the extended .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... separately from the customers, the amount collected is to be treated as inclusive of duty. Accordingly, we hold that the demand for the normal period is to be computed by taking the amount collected as cum-duty. 8. Regarding the penalty imposed, the Appellant submits that they have not suppressed any information from the department. We observe that there were decisions of the Tribunals that the sales tax concession retained by the assesses is not required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. Thus, the appellant cannot be faulted for not including the same in the assessable value. In the impugned order, the adjudicating authority while agreeing that extended period not invocable in this case, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l appeal, High Court has held that CESTAT in its order has observed that under Circular dated 30.06.2000 CBEC had clarified that such amount retained by the assessee is not required to be added to the assessable value. This view was negated by Apex court in the above said orders. Since there was no clarity on the issue, the assessee cannot be said to be at fault, hence extended period would not be available to raise the demand . 10. In the said clarification, the order passes by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Synotex has also been included and it has been categorically stated that extended period not invocable in such cases. In the present case, we observe that the Adjudicating Authority has failed to show any positive a .....

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