2009 (5) TMI 637

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ereafter distribute to their depots in various States. As a result, actual sales tax and octroi paid is not correctly known at the time of clearance. They also incur freight referred to as secondary freight from Central Stocking Point to various depots. The applicant claims that they made available certain discounts to customers based on turn over etc. at the end of quarter or at the end of the year by issue of credit notes. The original authority on the basis of show cause notice proposing demand of differential duty of Rs. 3.22 crores, confirmed the demand of  Rs. 2,81,41,807/- along with interest and imposed equal penalty. The applicant seeks waiver of pre-deposit of these dues as per the impugned order. 3. Learned Consultant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ctually incurred during the respective financial year. He took us to various documents particularly page 141, 148 and 155 of the appeal book to support his submission that only what was claimed in excess of what was due to them has been disallowed by the Commissioner and duty demanded. 5. Learned Consultants, in rejoinder, submitted that there is duplication in the demand and that there is excess demand in certain cases. He particularly draws our attention to para E2 and E6 of the grounds of appeal and states that it includes a major sum of about of Rs. 1.27 crores on needles and syringes which according to the applicant is not dutiable and the show cause notice issued by the Department is yet to be adjudicated. He submits that sum of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the yardstick under which these deductions on account of tax and other expenses could be allowed. It would be appropriate to reproduce para 39, 41, 42 of the said judgment. 39. Now coming to the question of deduction claimed by the assessee on account of payment of octroi and turnover tax, we are in agreement with the view expressed by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment that the expenses for these items were deductible from the assessable value under Section 4(4)(d)(ii). 41. In the case of Commissioner of Customs & Excise, Bangalore v. M/s. Sujata Textile Mills Ltd. reported in 2005 (181) E.L.T. 379, this Court [speaking through one of us, Variava, J.] has held that under Section 4(4)(d)(ii), the value will not include duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X