M/S. Flomatic Engineers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

M/S. Flomatic Engineers vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Mar 15, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/21475

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/21475
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Mar 15, 2001
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M/S. Flomatic Engineers

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

1. the departmental representative accepts that the question for consideration in this appeal, the includability in the assesssable value of the goods manufactured by the appellant of the notional interest on advances taken by it form its buyers, is covered by various decisions of the supreme court and the tribunal [such as vst industries ltd. vs cce 198 (97) elt 395]. neither the order of the assistant commissioner (appeals) indicates any nexus between the fact of advances and reduction in price. in the absence of any such nexus, the notional interest is not includable in the assessable value.

Full Judgment

1. The Departmental representative accepts that the question for consideration in this appeal, the includability in the assesssable value of the goods manufactured by the appellant of the notional interest on advances taken by it form its buyers, is covered by various decisions of the Supreme Court and the Tribunal [such as VST Industries Ltd. Vs CCE 198 (97) ELT 395]. Neither the order of the Assistant Commissioner (Appeals) indicates any nexus between the fact of advances and reduction in price. In the absence of any such nexus, the notional interest is not includable in the assessable value.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties M/S. Flomatic Engineers vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Service Tax