9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Determination of wholesale cash price for excise duty assessment.
Summary: The appeal questioned the Excise authorities' rejection of the price at which the manufacturer sold products to a specific buyer as the wholesale cash price. The sales in question were of water heaters to Messrs Philips India Ltd. and retailers during a specific period. The authorities justified the rejection based on the buyer being a sole selling agent and favored buyer. The Deputy Collector confirmed revised prices for the period and directed a change in assessable value. The manufacturer's appeal and subsequent revision petition were dismissed without proper consideration. Upon a writ petition, the court upheld the authorities' findings that the buyer was favored due to discounts for bulk purchases. However, the appellant argued that without proving non-arms length transactions, the conclusions were unjustified. The Department argued based on lower prices to the buyer and additional services provided. The court noted errors in applying the concept of 'related person' and highlighted the narrow scope of the definition. Citing legal precedents, the court emphasized that commercial pricing and agreements for services do not negate a sale as wholesale. The court found the buyer's status as favored unjustified, considering normal business practices. The judgment favored the manufacturer, setting the wholesale cash price for the relevant period. The court allowed the appeal, overturned the previous order, and awarded costs to the appellant. This judgment clarifies the criteria for determining wholesale cash price for excise duty assessment, emphasizing commercial pricing practices and the narrow interpretation of 'related person' in such matters.
|
