1993 (3) TMI 100 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of show cause notices and orders issued by the Central Excise authorities.
2. Approval of price-lists and calculation of excise duty based on submitted price-lists.
3. Claims for various deductions from the assessable values of products.

Summary:

1. Validity of Show Cause Notices and Orders:
The petitioners challenged certain show cause notices and orders issued by the Central Excise authorities. The court did not specifically address the validity of these notices and orders in the judgment.

2. Approval of Price-Lists and Calculation of Excise Duty:
The petitioners sought approval of their price-lists and permission to clear goods upon payment of excise duty based on these lists. The court directed the assessing authorities to permit the submission of statements of deductions/amendments for proper determination of excise duty liability.

3. Claims for Various Deductions:
- Trade Discount: The assessing authority allowed a trade discount of 3% shown on invoices.
- Annual Turnover Rebate: Allowed at a uniform rate of 2% for decorative sales but disallowed for industrial sales due to lack of evidence.
- Bonus Discount: The Assistant Collector was directed to recalculate the bonus discount after finding the method of calculation used by the petitioners unacceptable.
- Product Rebate and Additional Product Rebate: The Assistant Collector's rejection was set aside, and he was directed to calculate the rebate afresh.
- Free Supply Scheme: The rejection based on non-uniformity was overturned, and the Assistant Collector was directed to grant the discount.
- Incentive Discount: The disallowance was found unjustified, and the Assistant Collector was directed to grant the discount.
- Cash Discount: The Assistant Collector was directed to grant the discount in light of the judgment in Jenson & Nicholson.
- Freight: The petitioners were entitled to deduct freight charges from the sales godowns to local customers' premises.

Additional Observations:
- The court noted that the Assistant Collector's findings were contrary to law or not supported by material evidence.
- The court did not address the applicability of Section 11-D of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, due to lack of material evidence.
- The court made the rule absolute to the extent set out and ordered no costs.

Conclusion:
The court directed the Central Excise authorities to reconsider various deductions claimed by the petitioners and to finalize the price-lists/refund claims within specified periods, ensuring compliance with legal precedents and proper calculation methods.