Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. C.C.E.

Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd. vs C.C.E.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 16, 2005

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/38492

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/38492
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: J Balasundaram, Vice, A T V.K.
Decided On: Mar 16, 2005
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

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

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd.

Respondent

C.C.E.

Excerpt

1. duty demand of rs. 3,44,667/- has been confirmed by disallowing cash discount as deduction from the value of cotton yarn and blended yarn manufactured and cleared by the appellants during the period august 1998 to june 2000.2. we have heard both sides. the appellants restrict their claim to those invoices bearing the endorsement of cash discount either typed or rubber-stamped. since the cash discount was known to buyers prior to the removal of the goods by way of the endorsement on the invoices, the appellant are entitled to deduction of cash discount from the assessable value in the light of the judgment of the hon'ble bombay high court in the case of goodlass nerolac paints ltd. v. union of india 1993 (65) elt 186 (bom) affirmed by the apex court in 1994 (73) elt a58 and the judgment of the hon'ble karnataka high court in the case of h & r jhonson (india) ltd. v. central board of excise and customs 1998 (101) elt 251 (kar). we, therefore, hold that the appellants are entitled to deduction in respect of amounts covered by the invoices bearing endorsement of cash discount.

Full Judgment

1. Duty demand of Rs. 3,44,667/- has been confirmed by disallowing cash discount as deduction from the value of cotton yarn and blended yarn manufactured and cleared by the appellants during the period August 1998 to June 2000.

2. We have heard both sides. The appellants restrict their claim to those invoices bearing the endorsement of cash discount either typed or rubber-stamped. Since the cash discount was known to buyers prior to the removal of the goods by way of the endorsement on the invoices, the appellant are entitled to deduction of cash discount from the assessable value in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd. v. Union of India 1993 (65) ELT 186 (Bom) affirmed by the Apex Court in 1994 (73) ELT A58 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of H & R Jhonson (India) Ltd. v. Central Board of Excise and Customs 1998 (101) ELT 251 (Kar). We, therefore, hold that the appellants are entitled to deduction in respect of amounts covered by the invoices bearing endorsement of cash discount.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd. vs C.C.E. Same Subject MRTP Same Judge J Balasundaram, Vice, A T V.K.