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

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (4) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2005 (4) TMI 475 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty arising from the difference between transportation and insurance charges collected by the applicants.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, involved a case where the applicants sought a waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 17,66,394/-, based on the difference between charges collected from buyers and actual expenses incurred. The Tribunal considered the debatable issue in light of the precedent set by the Tribunal in M/s. Tripty Drinks (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar-I, where it was held that extra amounts collected from buyers for transportation, even if not utilized, constitute additional consideration for the sale of goods and should be included in the assessable value. This decision was upheld by the Apex Court. The Tribunal distinguished this from the judgment in Baroda Electric Meters Limited v. CCE, which the applicants relied upon. The Adjudicating Authority also favored the Tripty Drinks case. As a result, the Tribunal found no strong prima facie case for total waiver and directed a pre-deposit of Rs. 4 lakhs towards duty within eight weeks. Upon this pre-deposit, the balance duty and penalty would be waived, and recovery stayed pending the appeal. Non-compliance would lead to the vacation of stay and dismissal of the appeal without prior notice. The compliance deadline was set for 27-6-2005.

This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the Tribunal's careful consideration of legal precedents and the specific circumstances of the case in determining the requirement for pre-deposit and the conditions for waiver. The decision reflects a balanced approach, taking into account both the arguments of the applicants and the legal principles established by previous rulings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates