9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (10) TMI 1028 - AT - Central ExciseRetention of sales tax amount collected from customers - tax concession allowed by Entitlement Certificate dated 1.12.2006 - whether the appellant is liable to pay duty on the amount retained as Sales Tax collected from the customers as per the Entitlement Certificate issued by the Haryana Vat Department or not? - Held that - the issue came up before the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Limited 2014 (9) TMI 229 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon ble Apex Court held that the amount retained on account of sales tax as per the Entitlement Certificate is to be added in the assessable value - demand upheld. Extended period of limitation - Held that - the extended period is not invokable as the issue whether the appellant is liable to pay duty on the amount retained by them collected on account of sales tax from their customers as per Entitlement Certificate issued by the Haryana Vat department was in dispute and the same has been settled in 2014 - extended period not invoked. As the appellant has not collected any duty on the amount of sales tax retained by them, the appellant is entitled to cum duty benefit. Appeal allowed in part.
Issues involved:
1. Liability to pay duty on amount retained as Sales Tax under Entitlement Certificate. 2. Applicability of extended period for invoking penalties. 3. Dropping of overlapping demands as per show cause notices. Analysis: Issue 1: Liability to pay duty on amount retained as Sales Tax under Entitlement Certificate The appellant contested the demand of duty on the amount retained as Sales Tax collected from customers under the Entitlement Certificate issued by the Haryana Vat Department. The Tribunal referred to the Maruti Suzuki India Limited case where the Supreme Court held that the amount retained on account of sales tax should be added to the assessable value. The appellant relied on unrelated decisions under different state VAT Acts. The Tribunal noted that those decisions were not applicable as the appellant operated under the Haryana Vat Act. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant was liable to pay duty on the retained amount as per the Entitlement Certificate. Issue 2: Applicability of extended period for invoking penalties The Tribunal observed that the extended period for invoking penalties was not applicable as the issue of duty liability was in dispute until the Maruti Suzuki India Limited case settled it in 2014. Therefore, the extended period was not invokable in this case. Issue 3: Dropping of overlapping demands as per show cause notices The Tribunal noted that there were overlapping demands for the period December 2006 to October 2007 due to multiple show cause notices. The adjudicating authority had dropped a demand of ?1,31,39,642 as it overlapped. The Tribunal upheld the dropping of this demand and set aside demands within the extended period, confirming demands within the normal period. The appellant was granted cum-duty benefit, and no penalty was imposed due to the non-invocable extended period. In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by dropping certain demands, setting aside extended period demands, confirming normal period demands, granting cum-duty benefit, and not imposing any penalties on the appellant.
|
