9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that all the cases would be governed by the fate of M/s Marudhara Motors pending decision before the Apex Court. To avoid multiplication of the litigation it would be appropriate to dispose off all the petitions as raised by the Revenue to avoid multiplicity of litigation to be governed by the judgment of M/s Marudhara Motors by the Apex Court. If the civil appeal in M/s Marudhara Motors is allowed by the Apex Court in favour of the revenue then these revision petitions would be allowed automatically. However, if the Judgment of this court in M/s Marudhara Motors is upheld by the Apex Court, then all these petitions would stand automatically dismissed. It would be appropriate to dispose off the present petitions to say and to hold t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent, effect sale of the vehicle manufactured, spare parts and provide service support and is under contractual obligation to provide support during warranty period. Though the respondent/dealer issues its own invoices for sale of car, collecting local sales tax but the price cannot exceed maximum price prescribed by the manufacturer. However, under the warranty, if some parts have gone defective, such parts have to be replaced, free of cost to the customers of the respondent and the respondent is duty bound to replace the parts free of cost and later on, raises credit note with the manufacturer. It was claimed that such replacement of defective parts during the warranty is neither liable to sales tax, as there is no sale nor lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt of Gujarat in Kataria Automobiles (P.) Ltd. (supra) has distinguished the Judgment of this court in M/s Marudhara Motors (supra). In the alternative he contended that the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s Marudhara Motors (supra) has been challenged by the Revenue before the Apex Court and SLP has been admitted by the Apex Court. 6. Counsel for the revenue also relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in the Case of Official Liquidator Vs. Dayanand and Ors. (2008) 10 SCC, 1 to support, that the judgment of the Apex Court is binding on all courts and cannot be discarded by other forums. 7. Per contra learned counsel for the assessee's contended that the facts of the case of M/s Marudhara Motors (supra) are identical and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ors (supra) has distinguished the judgment of Apex Court in the Case of Mohd. Ekram Khan Sons (supra) with reasons to distinguish and the fact is that the judgment of M/s Marudhara Motors (supra) passed by this Court is in challenge before the Apex Court and taking into consideration the prayer made by the counsel for the parties to avoid multiplication of the litigation it would be appropriate to dispose off all the petitions as raised by the Revenue to avoid multiplicity of litigation to be governed by the judgment of M/s Marudhara Motors (supra) by the Apex Court. If the civil appeal in M/s Marudhara Motors (supra) is allowed by the Apex Court in favour of the revenue then these revision petitions would be allowed automatically. Howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
