Topic

Valuation

6 articlesLatest September 2026
Contingent Development Rights Not Valued As Present Rights Under Article 5(g-a)(i) | Maharashtra Stamp Act : Bombay HC
Case Law Analysis
|Bombay High Court

Contingent Development Rights Not Valued As Present Rights Under Article 5(g-a)(i) | Maharashtra Stamp Act : Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court held that stamp duty on a Joint Development Agreement cannot be levied on future contingent development rights as if they were present vested rights, quashing orders that inflated valuation beyond rights existing on the execution date. The ruling clarifies that valuation under Article 5(g-a)(i) must reflect only the development rights actually transferred at the time of agreement execution, protecting developers from excessive duty demands on speculative future entitlements.

Service Tax | Member-Based Organisation Not Liable as Manpower Supply Agency Without Intermediary Function : CESTAT Bangalore
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Service Tax | Member-Based Organisation Not Liable as Manpower Supply Agency Without Intermediary Function : CESTAT Bangalore

CESTAT Bangalore ruled that the Self Employed Women's Association (SEWA), a member-based trade union, does not qualify as a 'manpower recruitment or supply agency' under the Finance Act, 1994, because the workers are members of the organisation rather than employees deployed through an intermediary service. The decision clarifies that the mutuality principle excludes such collective self-employment arrangements from service tax liability, impacting similar member-driven collectives and cooperatives.

District Valuation Committee report admissible; 60% deduction & 10% annual escalation upheld under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 | Gujarat HC
Case Law Analysis
|Gujarat High Court

District Valuation Committee report admissible; 60% deduction & 10% annual escalation upheld under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 | Gujarat HC

The Gujarat High Court ruled that a District Valuation Committee report is valid evidence for compensation when sale deeds are missing, and upheld the 60 % market-value deduction with a 10 % annual escalation. This sets a clear valuation method for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, affecting both landowners and acquiring authorities.

CAS-4 Governs Valuation for State-Owned Manufacturers; Unjust Enrichment Inapplicable to Central Excise Refund Claims : CESTAT Chennai
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

CAS-4 Governs Valuation for State-Owned Manufacturers; Unjust Enrichment Inapplicable to Central Excise Refund Claims : CESTAT Chennai

CESTAT Chennai rules that Integral Coach Factory’s refund claims for excess excise duty are not barred by unjust enrichment, as state-owned entities engaged in public manufacturing are exempt from this doctrine. Valuation must follow CAS-4 standards, not the Railway Code, affirming that cost-based accounting methods used in batch production are legally valid for duty calculation and refund eligibility.

Central Excise Valuation | Consolidated Evidence Suffices for Trade Discount Abatement; One-to-One Correlation Not Required : CESTAT Chennai
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Central Excise Valuation | Consolidated Evidence Suffices for Trade Discount Abatement; One-to-One Correlation Not Required : CESTAT Chennai

CESTAT Chennai rules that abatement for trade discounts in jewellery trade can be granted based on consolidated sales data and Chartered Accountant certificates, without requiring transaction-wise correlation. This eases compliance burdens for manufacturers adopting provisional assessments under Rule 7 of Central Excise Rules, particularly in industries with fluctuating prices and indirect sales channels.