2003 (10) TMI 192 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispute over three discounts allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals): Quantity trade discounts, Bank charges for collection of sale proceeds, and Price-equalisation discount.

Analysis:

1. The Revenue appealed a portion of the Commissioner (Appeals) Order regarding the three discounts. The Tribunal noted that the matter of quantity trade discounts and bank charges had been settled in favor of the assessee by the Apex Court's judgment in the assessee's own case. Additionally, the Tribunal mentioned that the issue of price equalisation discount had been decided in favor of the party in a previous case. Although the Revenue had appealed to the Apex Court, no stay order was issued against the Tribunal's decision. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and rejected it.

2. The consultant representing the assessee argued for the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal based on the precedents set by the Apex Court and the Tribunal's order.

3. The Senior Departmental Representative (SDR) reiterated the grounds of appeal, seeking to reverse the discounts allowed by the Commissioner and confirm the original order.

4. After careful consideration, the Tribunal referenced the Apex Court's judgment in the assessee's case, which established the eligibility of quantity trade discounts under Section 4 of the CE Act. Similarly, the Apex Court ruled that bank charges are not part of the assessable value. The Tribunal also cited the case of Nestle (India) Ltd. v. Collector, where it was held that the assessee is entitled to the price equalisation discount. Given the clear precedents established by the Apex Court and the Tribunal's decision in the Nestle case, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and rejected it.