PNB fraud due to failure of internal control, says RBI.:      Celeb jeweller Nirav Modi named in PNB’s $1.77-b fraud. Bank suspends 10 officers, lodges complaint with CBI; more banks may be hit. :      Bombay High Court in a hearing on 6th Feb, 2018 says GST regime is not user friendly. :      GST Network Chairman Ajay Bhushan return simplification panel to meet industry this week to simplify the return filing process.:    Finance Secretary Hasmukh Adhia said the Government stares at a Rs 50,000 crore GST revenue shortfall in the current fiscal. :    E-Way Bill which was to be rolled-out on 1st Feb is deferred to month-end due to technical glitches.:      TN raked in 22% more GST at Rs 23,318 crore between Jul-Dec 2017, against Rs 19,018 crore under VAT in the corresponding period the previous year. :      MoS,Corp Affairs PP Chaudhary says in Rajya Sabha that Govt has detected GST evasion of Rs 5.70 Crores in 16 cases during Jul-Nov 2017 - 6th Feb 2018. :      FM, Arun Jaitley says that States are not in favour of bringing the petroleum products under GST. :      The Finance Secretary, Hasmukh Adhia says out of 7 lakh tax payers who opted for composition scheme 5 lakhs had a turnover less than Rs 5 lakhs pa, though the exemption limit is upto Rs 20 lakhs. :     

CESTAT Chennai : Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli : 13th March, 2017

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
CHENNAI

Appeal No. E/711/2007
[Arising out of Order-in-Original No.30/COMMR/07 dt. 11.07.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli]

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd.
Appellant

Versus

Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli
Respondent

Appearance:
Ms.Minchu Mariam Punnoose, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) For the Respondent

CORAM :

Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
Honble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Technical Member

Date of Hearing / decision :13.03.2017

FINAL ORDER No.40485/2017

Per: D.N. Panda

Appellant says that this case is similar to that was dealt by Tribunal in Final Order Nos.42481/2016 dt. 19.12.2016 and 40285/2017 dt.23.01.2017 in respect of the same appellant. According to Revenue, appellant adopted sale price of Rs.200/- per MT in respect of clearance made to its related buyers while that was Rs.1800/- when sold to others. Appellant clarifies that the goods sold to other independent buyer viz. SIGCIL, was upon undertaking additional processes as stated in para (f) of the reply to the SCN filed before the authority on 15.6.2007 (Ref. Page 27 of the appeal folder). But unprocessed goods were sold to related party i.e. TAC. It is further clarification of the appellant that volume of sale between related party (TAC) and unrelated party (SICGIL) was in the ratio of 95 :5. TAC was a bulk buyer of manufactured goods.


2. Revenue contends that huge difference in the pricing has caused prejudice to Revenue.


3. In the previous final orders referred to above, Tribunal has considered that in absence of any market enquiry done and also peculiar circumstances brought out, it is difficult for the Tribunal to agree with the allegation of Revenue. The present case also suffers from similar difficulties. Therefore, without dilating the matter further, following the judicial discipline, this appeal is also allowed.


(Dictated and pronounced in open court)


(Madhu Mohan Damodhar)                 (D.N. Panda)
Technical Member                     Judicial Member


gs



Additional Info

  • Date Range: Monday, 13 March 2017
  • Court/Authority: CESTAT
  • Tax Type: Central Excise
  • Petitioner/Appellant: Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli
  • Respondent: Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli
  • Appl no. or Appl year: Appeal No. E/711/2007
  • Supreme Court Location: Delhi
  • CESTAT Location: Chennai
  • AAR Location: Delhi
  • Authority: Supreme Court

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 

correctly?

If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes

 

  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues


 

Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Go to top