9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 913X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was described as Pooja Scented Supari, the consignment was held to be Scented Supari which being an unclassified item was liable to tax at 14%. This being a finding of fact based upon the nature of the ingredients and its contents mentioned on the consignment itself, I do not find any error in the finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal. Value of consignment - Held that:- it was the stand of the revisionist that the goods were valued at ₹ 1,17,000/- and even in the memo of appeal he has taken a plea in ground no.5 that the value of the consignment was 1,17,000/-. The Joint Commissioner, Assessing Authority as well as the Tribunal have all noted this fact and yet come to the conclusion that the value of the consignment was ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no.1/25. Two show cause notices were issued to the revisionist on two different dates, one is dated 22.05.2014 and another is dated 24.05.2014. The joint Commissioner, Faizabad in the assessment proceedings assessed the value of the goods at ₹ 2,70,000/- and made a demand for security of money of ₹ 1,08,000/-. The contention of the revisionist, therefor is that the value of the goods was ₹ 1,17,000/- and besides the goods were Meethi Supari and not Scented Supari . The Assistant Commissioner, Mobile Squad, Faizabad, however, examined the documents on record and found that the consignment of Supari was being carried out in pouches and on each pouch, it was mentioned 'Pooja Sugandhit Supari and on the other side i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is case: 1. What was the value of the consignment ? and, 2. What was the nature of consignment, whether it was Meethi Supari or whether it was Scented Supari ? Taking the issue no.2 first, the Joint Commissioner, based upon the report of the Mobile Squad, a finding of fact has been recorded that on the pouches the contents were mentioned as Pooja Sugnadhit Supari and ingredients was mentioned as Betel Nut, Cardamom, Clove, contains added flavor . The Tribunal held that if it was Meethi Supari then it ought to have an element of Sugar or some sweetener and the same would have been mentioned on the pouch as a sweet ingredient but in the absence of any such mention of any sugar or sweetener and the fact that the on the pouch itself ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
