VidhiSangh

Supreme Court of India · 09/04/2019

M/S D.J. MALPANI versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NASHIK

[2019] 6 S.C.R. 925 · 2019 INSC 478

AI-generated headnote. Verify against the judgment before relying on it. Paragraph numbers refer to the judgment.

Summary

Optional Dharmada collected alongside the sale price, separately credited and actually donated to charity, was excluded from excise transaction value. The seller acted as a conduit holding the charitable amount in trust; the sale provided the occasion for payment rather than its consideration. The Supreme Court distinguished a statutory steel-development surcharge forming part of the price and held that Panchmukhi, which had applied that precedent without examining the distinction, was not good law.

Issues

  1. Whether genuine charitable Dharmada receipts formed part of excise transaction value.
  2. Whether the precedents concerning a statutory surcharge and Dharmada controlled the result.

Provisions considered

Held

Result

Appeal allowed and CESTAT judgment set aside. Reference answered that the optional Dharmada collected in this case was not part of transaction value.

Judgment PDF: Supreme Court of India, [2019] 6 S.C.R. 925.