9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 984X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resentative (DR) - for the Respondent. Per. B. Ravichandran :- The appeals ijs against order dated 15/05/2007 of Commissioner (Appeals-I), Jaipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of HV & LV Coils and transformers liable to Central Excise duty. The dispute in the present case relates to the quantification of sales tax abatement to arrive at value for Central Excise purpose in term ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that they are availing sales tax exemption under Notification Sl. No. 396 dated 22/02/2002 issued by Rajasthan Government. The said notification allowed claim for exemption from the sales tax payable by the dealer to the extent of tax paid on raw material purchased. The scheme of the notification is for providing set off in payment of sales tax and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of sales tax already paid on purchase. In this connection, we refer to Board Circular dated 09/10/2002. The Board clarified that the set off schemes of sales tax does not change the rate of sales tax payable/chargeable on the finished goods. The set of is not to be taken into account for calculating the amount of sales tax permissible as abatement for arriving at the assessable value under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Visakhapatnam reported in 2004 (169) E.L.T. 127 (Tri. - Bang.); and (iv) Subhash Udyog vs. CCE, Jaipur reported in 2009 (235) E.L.T. 143 (Tri. - Del.). 4. In view of the discussion, as above, and the ratio of decided cases, we find that the impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, the same is set aside and the appeal is allowed. (Order pronounced in open court on 06/0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
