itc Ltd. Vs. Cce

itc Ltd. vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jul 26, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/28597

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/28597
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: K Usha, N T C.N.B., B T K.K.
Decided On: Jul 26, 2002
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

itc Ltd.

Respondent

Cce

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(83)ECC316

Excerpt

1. heard both sides. the mistake pointed out in the r.o.m. application is a typographical mistake. we are also of the view that it is of no consequence as far as the order is concerned. the mistake is corrected and the relevant sentence in paragraph 15.2 reproduced from the order of the d.g. in paragraph 28 of the order of the tribunal will be read as follows: as the rule stands today, it is felt that the additional money value consideration cannot be relieved of the duty incidence before adding it to the price and the entire additional money value consideration has to be added to the price for working out the assessable value for the purposes of levy and collection of excise duty on the cigarettes. to be precise, the assessable value (s) of the cigarettes shall be the value (s) on which the company had paid the duty plus the additional money value consideration in respect of the items of expenditure identified in the preceding paras.

Full Judgment

1. Heard both sides. The mistake pointed out in the R.O.M. application is a typographical mistake. We are also of the view that it is of no consequence as far as the order is concerned. The mistake is corrected and the relevant sentence in paragraph 15.2 reproduced from the order of the D.G. in paragraph 28 of the order of the Tribunal will be read as follows: As the rule stands today, it is felt that the additional money value consideration cannot be relieved of the duty incidence before adding it to the price and the entire additional money value consideration has to be added to the price for working out the assessable value for the purposes of levy and collection of excise duty on the cigarettes. To be precise, the assessable value (s) of the cigarettes shall be the value (s) on which the company had paid the duty plus the additional money value consideration in respect of the items of expenditure identified in the preceding paras.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties itc Ltd. vs Cce Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge K Usha, N T C.N.B., B T K.K.