2003 (1) TMI 363 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the appellant is entitled to avail abatement for assessable value on account of Turnover Discount, interest reimbursed, and Commission paid.
2. Whether the turnover discount, interest reimbursement, and commission paid are admissible for exclusion from the assessable value.
3. Whether the appellant can claim deduction on an equalized basis for turnover discount, interest reimbursement, and commission paid.

Analysis:

1. The appellant appealed against the order rejecting their claim for abatement on Turnover Discount, interest reimbursement, and Commission paid. The appellant contended that the abatement claim was based on the actual amounts paid under the three heads. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the claim, citing reasons related to the method of granting discount and lack of evidence for interest claimed. The Tribunal found the appellant entitled to claim deduction for turnover discount and interest reimbursement as the amounts were calculated based on actual grants to each dealer, not on an equalized basis.

2. The Tribunal examined the admissibility of turnover discount, interest reimbursement, and commission paid for exclusion from the assessable value. The Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed the deductions, citing reasons such as the nature of discounts, lack of evidence for interest claimed, and the nature of commission paid to selling agents. The Tribunal referred to relevant case laws and found the appellant entitled to deduction for turnover discount and interest reimbursement based on actual amounts granted to each dealer.

3. The issue of claiming deduction on an equalized basis for turnover discount, interest reimbursement, and commission paid was also addressed. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties, including references to previous decisions by higher courts. While the appellant argued for deduction based on actual amounts paid, the Revenue contended that deductions should not be on an equalized basis. The Tribunal found the appellant entitled to claim deduction for turnover discount and interest reimbursement based on actual amounts granted to each dealer. However, the claim for deduction on commission paid to sales representatives was rejected based on the interpretation of relevant case laws by the Supreme Court.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the order in part regarding turnover discount and interest reimbursement while upholding the finding on commission paid to sales representatives. The quantum of duty was to be recomputed based on the allowed deductions, taking into consideration the pre-deposit made by the appellant.