2008 (4) TMI 290

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice President] - Heard both sides. 2. Appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby abatement claim filed by the appellants in respect of Rajasthan Sales Tax was disallowed and ordered to be added to the assessable value of the goods on the ground that the appellants were entitled for abatement only to net amount of sales tax paid by them .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rmissible as abatement for arriving at the assessable value u/s. 4. Contention is that, in view of the above circular quantum of set-off which was in respect of sales tax cannot be added to the assessable value of the goods. 4. Revenue's contention is that, as the appellants had not paid the actual amount of sales tax regarding which they claimed abatement, therefore, only the net amount of sales .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x Act the assessee is entitled for set-off in respect of sales tax paid on purchase of raw material. We find that the Board has clarified in 2 circulars relied upon by the appellants that amount of sales tax will be permission as deduction under Section 4 as is equal to the amount legally permissible under the local sales tax laws to be charged/billed from the customer/buyer. Board clarified that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X