Order
Civil Appeal No. 6721 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No. 23461 of 2012
1. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. The civil appeal filed by the Department concerns Assessment Year 1995-1996. The judgment of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemical Co. Ltd. (2000) 245 ITR 384 (Bom) squarely applies to this case and the same has been affirmed by this Court in CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. (2003) 11 SCC 452, (2003) 261 ITR 275 The assessee followed the net method of valuation of closing stock. The authorities below are right in coming to the conclusion that Modvat credit is excise duty paid.
3. In the circumstances, the civil appeal filed by the Department is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Civil Appeal No. 6723 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No. 35282 of 2010, Civil Appeal No. 6722 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No. 35277 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 6725 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No. 3082 of 2011
4. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. Leave granted.
5. These civil appeals filed by the Department concern Assessment Year 1997-1998. The assessee (s) follows net method of valuation of closing stock [see note of the Auditor in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 35282 of 2010 at p. 217]. The note reads as under:
“As per the practice consistently followed, excise duty payable estimated at Rs 1,43,66,145 on finished goods held in factory are neither included in expenditure nor valued in such stocks but are accounted for on clearance of goods from factory. This accounting treatment however has no impact on the profit for the year.”
6. For the above reasons, the civil appeals filed by the Department are dismissed with no order as to costs.
Civil Appeal No. 6724 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No. 2027 of 2011
7. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. Leave granted.
8. This civil appeal filed by the Department concerns Assessment Year 1997-1998. The assessee follows net method of valuation of closing stock (see note of the Auditor at p. 25, para 8 of the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent). The note reads as under:
“Excise.—The Company has been accounting liabilities for excise duty on finished products lying in the factory when clearance is made. The liabilities in respect of the finished products lying at the factory at the close of the year has not been provided for in the books of accounts and hence not included in the valuation of inventory of the finished products. However non-provision of the excise duty as stated above has no impact on the profit of the year.”
9. For the above reasons, the civil appeal filed by the Department is dismissed with no order as to costs.