2014 (3) TMI 920 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation - waiver of pre-deposit - whether the trade discount passed on by the appellant to Oil Marketing Company can be considered as trade discount or not and whether excise duty is leviable on this amount considering the same as part of the value of the goods sold - Held that - stay petition came up for consideration before this Tribunal on the last occasion on 21.1.2014, this Tribunal after considering the submissions made by both the sides, directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the duty confirmed on the ground that on the earlier decisions, pre-deposit was ordered taking into account the demand for the normal period of time. In the case before us, the entire demand is for the normal period of time. It is a well settled position that while considering various decisions on a matter, the latest decision should be preferred as that would have taken into account all the previous decisions on the subject - Conditional stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Original confirming excise duty demand.
2. Whether trade discount passed on to Oil Marketing Company is liable for excise duty.
3. Pre-deposit amount for stay application based on previous Tribunal decisions.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to an appeal against an Order-in-Original confirming an excise duty demand of Rs.1,68,90,942/- for the period April, 2011 to October, 2011. The appellant contested the order, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal.

2. The primary issue in this case revolves around determining whether the trade discount provided by the appellant to an Oil Marketing Company should be considered as part of the value of goods sold for excise duty purposes. The appellant argued that this question had been the subject of multiple appeals before the Tribunal, with significant demands made by Revenue authorities since June 2003. The appellant sought a stay on the demand, proposing a pre-deposit of 6% of the duty confirmed, or alternatively, requested the case to be transferred to another Tribunal bench that had previously decided on a similar matter.

3. The appellant's counsel highlighted previous Tribunal decisions, including a case involving Bhagyanagar Gas Ltd., where stay was granted based on the amount paid compared to the demand confirmed. On the other hand, the Addl. Commissioner for the Revenue cited a recent Tribunal decision that directed a pre-deposit of 50% of the confirmed duty amount within eight weeks. The Tribunal considered these arguments and observed that the latest decision should be preferred, as it would have considered all previous decisions on the matter. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the excise duty confirmed within eight weeks, with the remaining dues' pre-deposit waived and recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency.

4. The Tribunal set a compliance reporting date and concluded the judgment, emphasizing the importance of following the latest decision in similar matters. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the issues raised, the arguments presented by both sides, and the Tribunal's reasoning behind the decision on the pre-deposit amount for the stay application.