Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2016-17/3198

Entry tax payable before clearance of goods, whether includible in assessable value?

Case-INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-I
 
Citation-2016 (336) E.L.T. 660 (Tri. - Del.)

Brief Facts-These appellants filed this appeal against the order dated 10-5-2006 of Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur, II. The Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of petroleum products and clear the same through various storage terminals. The appellants were having central excise registration for bonded warehouse at Salawas, Rajasthan. They were receiving petroleum products under bond from outside the State of Rajasthan. There was an entry tax of 1%. When the appellants cleared goods from warehouse they paid central excise duty as well as the entry tax. The Revenue entertained the view that since the entry tax is payable before clearance of goods, the same is includible in the assessable value. Proceedings initiated against appellant concluded in the order confirming demand of differential duty and imposing penalty. On appeal the order was confirmed. On further appeal the appellant is before us.

Appelants Contention-Learned Counsel for the appellant Shri L.P. Asthana submitted the entry tax is collected by the appellant at the time of sale only and not when the goods entered the State of Rajasthan. The clarifications dated 5-7-2002 and 18-7-2002 make it clear about the method of collection of this levy. The entry tax is collected from the customer along with sale price of goods. As such, the learned Counsel pleaded that the said tax is deductible in terms of Section 4(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
 
Respondents Contention-Learned AR Shri S. Nunthuk reiterated the findings in the impugned order.

Reasoning Of Judgement-The tribunal have heard both the sides and perused appeal records. The includibility of entry tax in the assessable value of goods cleared by the appellant from the bonded warehouse in Rajasthan is in dispute. The reason for the inclusion, mentioned in the impugned order, is that since the tax is on entry of goods the same is to be part of assessable value for clearance from warehouse later. They find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) did not appreciate the facts of the case in correct legal perspective. The entry tax, as the name suggest, is on the entry of goods into Rajasthan. But the State Government categorically stated that the same can be collected and paid on the basis of prevalent market value of goods. The entry tax can be recovered through invoices at the time of sale. They find that the value under Section 4 does not include the amount of the duty of excise, sales tax and other taxes, if any, payable on such goods. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bombay Tyre International, 1984 (17)E.L.T.329 (S.C.) held that sales tax, turnover tax and octroi where payable/paid should be allowed deduction. In appellant’s own case for the earlier periods on the same issue, the Commissioner after de novo proceedings vide his order dated 31-3-2014 dropped the demand. The learned Commissioner drew a parallel based on exclusion of excise duty from transaction value. Excise duty though on manufacture is collected at the time of clearance. Here the entry tax though on entry is collected on sale of goods inside the State. On careful examination of the above facts and legal position, tribunal find that the entry tax paid by the appellant is not includible in the value for excise duty. Accordingly, they set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
 
Decision-Appeal allowed
 
Comment-The crux of the case is that according to Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 Excise duty, sales tax and other taxes payable are not includible in assessable value. The similar facts are supported by the decision in the case of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bombay Tyre International.Therefore, such entry tax not includible in value of goods.

Prepared By-Neelam Jain
 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com