No appeal would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on factual findings of the Tribunal
PrintListen to this Article
0:00
0:00
Dear Professional Colleague,
No appeal would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on factual findings of the Tribunal
We are sharing with you an important judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Koya & Company Construction (Pvt.) Ltd. [(2014) 52 taxmann.com 342 (SC)] on following issue:
Issue:
Whether an appeal can be lay before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on factual findings of the Tribunal?
Facts & background:
Koya & Company Construction Pvt. Ltd. (“the Assessee”) was engaged in the manufacture and selling of PSC pipes. The Assessee cleared the PSC pipes on payment of Excise duty to KCCL, an interconnected undertaking. The duty liability was calculated on Transaction Value in respect of clearance made to an interconnected undertaking.
The Department argued that since there was 'mutuality of interest' as the Assessee had received interest-free advance of Rs. 7.2 crores from his inter connected undertaking, therefore the Assessable Value was to be determined as per Rule 9 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules 2000 (“the Valuation Rules”)
The Assessee filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal arguing that:
No appeal would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on factual findings of the Tribunal
We are sharing with you an important judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Koya & Company Construction (Pvt.) Ltd. [(2014) 52 taxmann.com 342 (SC)] on following issue:
Issue:
Whether an appeal can be lay before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on factual findings of the Tribunal?
Facts & background:
Koya & Company Construction Pvt. Ltd. (“the Assessee”) was engaged in the manufacture and selling of PSC pipes. The Assessee cleared the PSC pipes on payment of Excise duty to KCCL, an interconnected undertaking. The duty liability was calculated on Transaction Value in respect of clearance made to an interconnected undertaking.
The Department argued that since there was 'mutuality of interest' as the Assessee had received interest-free advance of Rs. 7.2 crores from his inter connected undertaking, therefore the Assessable Value was to be determined as per Rule 9 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules 2000 (“the Valuation Rules”)
The Assessee filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal arguing that:
- Interest-free advance was a commercial transaction, which was reduced from Rs. 7.2 crores on March 31, 2003 to Rs. 24 lakhs on March 31, 2004; and
- Since, the Assessee and his inter connect undertaking were not under
Holding and Subsidiary relationship, Rule 10 of the Valuation Rules was also inapplicable
Accordingly, the Hon’ble Tribunal held that:
Accordingly, the Hon’ble Tribunal held that:
- The advance had been decreased on account of supply of goods by the Assessee to buyer; therefore, it was a commercial transaction and there was no 'mutuality of interest';
- In absence of relationship as defined under Sections 4(3)(b)(ii)/(iii)/(iv) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, Rule 9 of the Valuation Rules or proviso thereto was not applicable;
- Rule 10(b) of the Valuation Rules would not be applicable because there is no Holding - Subsidiary relationship between the Assessee and his buyer of the goods.
- Accordingly, Assessable Value would be determined as per Rule 11 of the Valuation Rules i.e. best judgment and value will be determined just like captive consumption under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules.
Held:
Being aggrieved, the Department filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Apex Court.
The Hon’ble Apex Court after observing that the Tribunal had passed the order on the basis of facts and circumstance of the breitling replica watches case held that since the Tribunal is the final fact finding authority, no appeal would lie before the Supreme Court on such factual findings.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavors. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards,
Bimal Jain
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
Delhi:
Flat No. 34B, Ground Floor, Pocket - 1,
Mayur Vihar, Phase - I,
Delhi – 110091, India
Desktel: +91-11-22757595/ 42427056
Mobile: +91 9810604563
Email: bimaljain@hotmail.com
Being aggrieved, the Department filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Apex Court.
The Hon’ble Apex Court after observing that the Tribunal had passed the order on the basis of facts and circumstance of the breitling replica watches case held that since the Tribunal is the final fact finding authority, no appeal would lie before the Supreme Court on such factual findings.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavors. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards,
Bimal Jain
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
Delhi:
Flat No. 34B, Ground Floor, Pocket - 1,
Mayur Vihar, Phase - I,
Delhi – 110091, India
Desktel: +91-11-22757595/ 42427056
Mobile: +91 9810604563
Email: bimaljain@hotmail.com
Category : Excise | Comments : 0 | Hits : 233
The scheme of levy and collection of Central Excise duty on articles of Jewellery is as under: (a) The levy and collection of Central Excise Duty is on the manufacture of Jewellery (excluding...
Also Read -
Clarifications on Excise imposed on Jewellery
Clarifications on Excise imposed on Jewellery The strike by bullion traders and jewellers continued for the 8th day to protest the Budget proposal to impose one per cent excise duty(without inp...
Also Read -
No bar on admissibility of Cenvat credit either as Inputs or Capital goods at any stage of proceedings
Dear Professional Colleague, No bar on admissibility of Cenvat credit either as Inputs or Capital goods at any stage of proceedings We are sharing with you an important judgment of the Hon’ble...
Comments