SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 999

B. N. KIRPAL, J. S. VERMA
South India Alloy Industries – Appellant
Versus
Collector Of Central Excise – Respondent


ORDER

1. From the Tribunals order, it is clear that in some of the invoices recovered there was a specific endorsement that the price charged by the appellant was inclusive of the excise duty. There is no explanation by the appellant of this fact. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is no evidence that in every invoice the position was the same. It is sufficient to say that the onus was on the appellant to show that the other invoices showed a price which was different and that price did not include the excise duty. In the absence of any such effort made by the appellant, it has to be assumed that the appellant had passed on the excise duty in every transaction to the purchaser. This being so, for this reason alone the appellant is not entitled to the relief claimed.

2, The appeal is dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top