[raul]

I don't think you can compare India to Canada or Europe with full working welfare states so paying 50% tax is not a big deal, I would pay 60% tax in a welfare state to ensure everyone is looked after and at least has access to basic healthcare, education and the opportunity of a better life.

The debate here is not so much about tax but how it is used. The government continues to waste funds on itself. Subsidies are not effective tools to actually help poor people, the diesel and fertilizer subsidies are good examples, sure you do help some people but you end up assisting rich farmers and diesel car owners who don't need the subsidy. That's a waste of resources that could be better used for directly assisting those in need.

Also ideally people who put in a hard days work should not need subsidies to live but there are entire sections of Indian workers like construction workers, road workers and many more like the ship breakers who work in dangerous conditions who inspite of working hard cannot afford the basics because of exploitation and lack of effective regulation by the so called 'poor loving' government including the working class defender left parties and other associated bleeding hearts eveready to talk about 'poor people'.

By offering subsidies you are not helping these people but subsidizing rich builders and other exploiters of labour in India who should ideally pay them enough so they don't need subsidies. Those who don't have income have to helped in direct ways. We pay markets prices for real estate and builders cannot even offer the basic living and working conditions to their workers such is the greed and diversion of purchasing power in India. So let's look at effective ways of actually helping those in need rather than constantly crying about poor people.

Subsidies in India are an alternative to real effective assistance to those in need, distorts the economy, wastes funds that we can't afford and allows the government to essentially bribe different interest groups to create vote banks and remain in power.

[srijit]

My friend heard from a Chevy dealer that for Magnum, the price would increase Rs.30,000+. He said the same might happen for Aveo by around July 5th.

Anybody know if this is true? Is this excise price rise/stell price rise?

[byomjeet]

This is what I found about excise duty in India.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Autos/...1-1054293.aspx

[apachelongbow]

Originally Posted by byomjeet

This is what I found about excise duty in India.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Autos/...1-1054293.aspx

Thanks, but,, you replied to a 5 year old thread friend . Anyways the new excise duty is for cars defined as SUV or not SUV based on ground clearance, engine capacity, body length etc, which is different than what was earlier

[byomjeet]

Originally Posted by apachelongbow

Thanks, but,, you replied to a 5 year old thread friend . Anyways the new excise duty is for cars defined as SUV or not SUV based on ground clearance, engine capacity, body length etc, which is different than what was earlier

Thanks for the feedback buddy.

I replied to a 5 year old thread just to avoid starting a new thread and clutter my beloved TEM-BHP. I searched for fresh threads but couldn't get any.

Henceforth, I will take care.

Thanks again for your valuable inputs.

[volkman10]

Maruti SX4, Toyota Corolla Altis to attract 27% excise.

The clarification issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) has laid to rest the confusion whether these cars would attract 30 per cent excise applicable to Sports Utility Vehicle (SUVs) or 27 per cent meant for large sedans.


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/21308937.cms

[JayPrashanth]

Link to News Section



The Central Board for Excise and Customs, a governmental body in India that handles taxation, has confirmed that the higher excise duty that was levied on SUVs through the 2013 Union Budget will not apply to sedans such as the Maruti SX4, Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla Altis. A CBEC circular on the same reads as follows,

It is clarified that the afore-cited motor vehicles (Maruti SX4, Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla Altis), which are known as sedans, will attract the excise duty of 27 per cent as applicable to large segment cars.

Notably, Honda discontinued the Civic from the Indian market last year, much before the new excise norms took force. According to the new excise norms that targeted SUVs, cars with ground clearance higher than 170 mm, engine capacities of over 1.5 liters and length of over 4 meters, were liable to be taxed at 30 % excise, representing a 3 % hike from previous levels. The higher excise is not applicable to SUVs registered as taxis.

The higher excise is primarily aimed at private SUVs, which according to the Indian government, hog more space on roads. However, the differential excise norms led to some confusion as many sedans sold in India, such as the Toyota Corolla Altis and the Maruti Suzuki SX4, though technically not SUVs, fell in the higher tax bracket due to the specifications of their engines, ground clearances and lengths.



Now though, the CBEC has clarified that large sedans are exempt from the higher excise, which is applicable only to SUVs. The clarification could stir a hornet's nest as the government's claims of SUVs being taxed higher due to their larger dimensions might prove untenable given the fact that large sedans occupy the same footprint as many SUVs.

However, most sedans are lighter than most SUVs and are consequently more fuel efficient. Car makers for their part, especially those in the utility vehicle space, have been up in arms against the higher excise on SUVs. Car sales have slowed down and amid gloomy economic conditions, the SUV segment has witnessed good growth.

According to utility vehicle makers such as Tata Motors and Mahindra, the higher excise on SUVs will serve only to further dampen sentiment and throw a spanner into the wheels of an otherwise high growth segment. Despite a representation by the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers, a lobbying body of the automakers, the Finance Ministry has refused to do away with the differential excise duty on SUVs.

Source TheEconomicTimes

[MaxTorque]

This one of the funniest taxing method. No doubt our auto makers coming with solutions to escape such selective taxing. In my opinion the variable taxing should have done based on ex-showroom pricing of the car. eg vehicles with ex-showroom price less Rs.10 lakhs attract 27%, Rs.15 lakhs attract 30% so on.

[tanwaramit]

My question. Since this excise duty was applicable since 01st Apr 2013, the car makers would have been billing the extra excise from customers for these cars. What will happen to the extra money they got? They need not submit this extra tax to government, will they usurp this money Or will they refund the money to car owners ?

[Sommos]

Originally Posted by tanwaramit

My question. Since this excise duty was applicable since 01st Apr 2013, the car makers would have been billing the extra excise from customers for these cars. What will happen to the extra money they got? They need not submit this extra tax to government, will they usurp this money Or will they refund the money to car owners ?

Actually Excise Duty is paid at the time of removal of the goods from the factory. The duty amount shown in the Excise Invoice is payable by the manufacturer on the due date whether-or-not the car is actually sold off to a customer. The dealer eventually recovers that excise amount from the customer when the car is sold.

Whatever ED is shown in the Invoice has to be deposited to the Central Government within the due date and periodic returns are to be submitted. There is penalty and interest clause for short deposit/non deposit of ED.

[tanwaramit]

Originally Posted by Sommos

Actually Excise Duty is paid at the time of removal of the goods from the factory. The duty amount shown in the Excise Invoice is payable by the manufacturer on the due date whether-or-not the car is actually sold off to a customer. The dealer eventually recovers that excise amount from the customer when the car is sold.

Whatever ED is shown in the Invoice has to be deposited to the Central Government within the due date and periodic returns are to be submitted. There is penalty and interest clause for short deposit/non deposit of ED.

So that means Maruti and Toyota would have charged 30% excise and have also paid the amount to the government for cars produced out of factory post 01st April.

And now they will charge 27% and pay less amount and also the ex-showroom prices of these cars would drop due to clarification in reduction in excise.

So, buyers paid more money for all these months for cars due to confusion of the manufacturers. Government also got more money because of this confusion all along these 3.5 months.

[captain.torque]

In the CBEC statement it mentions Honda Civic along with SX4 and Corolla. So, why was the Civic lambasted for its low ground clearance as long as it was in production when it's GC was equivalent to Corolla and SX4?

[mroptimist]

Originally Posted by captain.torque

In the CBEC statement it mentions Honda Civic along with SX4 and Corolla. So, why was the Civic lambasted for its low ground clearance as long as it was in production when it's GC was equivalent to Corolla and SX4?

Nobody lambasted Civic for it's ground clearance but lousy suspension.

Because of the lousy (super soft) suspension, under load especially, underbody hitting was a frequent problem.

Hope this clarifies your doubt.

[captain.torque]

Originally Posted by mroptimist

Nobody lambasted Civic for it's ground clearance but lousy suspension.

Because of the lousy (super soft) suspension, under load especially, underbody hitting was a frequent problem.

Hope this clarifies your doubt.

Thanks for the information optimist