Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 2005 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (8) TMI 112 - SUPREME COURTWhether the benefit gained by the Respondents by reason of M/s. Visakhapatnam Steel Plant surrendering its licences and on such surrender the Respondents being issued licences, is additional consideration for the contract? Held that:- The question then arises as to how the "additional consideration" is to be computed. In this case the benefit accrued to the Respondents is clearly ascertainable by virtue of the two letters of the Respondents. Had this additional benefit not flown to the Respondents, they would have sold the items as per their offer dated 9th September 1992. As the additional consideration was to flow to them, they have sold at the rates mentioned in the letter of 2nd March 1993. The "additional consideration" is the difference in prices between these two. The Commissioner had thus correctly worked out this difference. It may also be mentioned that the Respondents had also taken up a contention of limitation. The Tribunal has not considered this aspect in view of the fact that it has allowed the Appeal on merits. We were requested that the matter be sent back to the Tribunal so that the Tribunal can consider the question of limitation. We are agreeable to that. We, therefore, remit the matter back to the Tribunal. The Tribunal is, therefore, directed to only consider whether or not the extended period of limitation was available to the Department. With these directions, the Appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
|