APPEALS NOS. 7(1520)CE/IB AND 7(1623)CE/IB OF 2001(PB), DECIDED ON 6TH APRIL, 2002. versus APPEALS NOS. 7(1520)CE/IB AND 7(1623)CE/IB OF 2001(PB), DECIDED ON 6TH APRIL, 2002.
Central Excise and Salt Act 1944 Sections 4 (1) and 3 (2) (3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, 8 210 sales tax, Act (VII of 1990), section 2 (46) and 33 for the purposes of section 33 Determination of the price of metal containers was assessed in accordance with market surveys as well as fixed prices, at a meeting with manufacturers and duty and sales tax demanded that additional duties, additional taxes and penalties be sold as well. Equal to 3% of the amount Involved in taxation The pricing mechanism cannot maintain a law test where the manufacturer (s) do not agree to such agreement or when they do not agree to such agreement the same price. Looks like tariff pricing or fixed pricing. Such determination of tariff value and / or fixed price by the Superintendent or Collector shall not be legal as only the Central Board of Revenue can and / or does so under Section 3 (2) (3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The provisions of section 2 (4) under the) Sales Tax Act, 1990 apply to such specialty or fixed price discrimination in a particular jurisdiction as the same proposed and agreed uniform price of such containers in a particular constituency. And other constituent reports indicate that he did not implement it. Consistent pricing was agreed upon, and, on the contrary, the accepted valuation of prices on a fixed price basis was not based on a valid survey or any such consensus. The consent of the SC may include neither the tariff value nor a fixed price under section 3 (2) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (3 the Central Excise Act, 1944).
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
list of supreme court advocates from Hala lawyer
