9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 780 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - cash discount - whether the cash discount realized back by the appellants through debit notes is chargeable to Central Excise duty? - Held that - there will be no need to add back the discount to the assessable value, even if the same are subsequently recovered - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Whether cash discount realized back through debit notes is chargeable to Central Excise duty. Analysis: The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of writing and printing papers, filed an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal disallowing the claim related to cash discount realized back through debit notes. The main issue revolved around whether such cash discounts are chargeable to Central Excise duty. The transaction value, as defined in the Central Excise Act, was crucial in determining the assessable value. The Tribunal referred to a previous case and a Supreme Court judgment to analyze the matter. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of transaction value under the new Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, emphasizing that the actual price paid by the buyers should be considered the assessable value. The Tribunal rejected the appeal regarding cash discount deduction, but remanded the issue of volume discount and sales tax for re-adjudication. The imposition of a penalty was left to the Adjudicating Authority's discretion. The Tribunal, after considering arguments from both parties and the legal precedents, concluded that the issue of cash discount and its impact on the assessable value was settled by a previous Supreme Court decision. The Tribunal emphasized that under the new Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, the transaction value, i.e., the actual price paid by buyers, should be the basis for determining the assessable value. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. The decision was made in line with the Supreme Court's ruling and the Tribunal's previous order on a similar issue.
|
