Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1999 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1999 (9) TMI 353 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Classification of dealers in Maharashtra into registered and unregistered categories. 2. Deductibility of 2% trade discount in computing the assessable value under Section 4 of the Act. Classification of Dealers in Maharashtra: The appeal involved a dispute over the classification of dealers in Maharashtra into registered and unregistered categories. The department argued that all registered dealers may not be paying sales tax, hence there should not be a classification. However, the tribunal disagreed, stating that registered dealers are bound by legal obligations under the Sales Tax Act, regardless of whether they are actively paying sales tax. The tribunal held that registered and unregistered dealers belong to separate classes as per the Act and rules of sales tax law, justifying different values for sale of goods. The appeal filed by the department was dismissed based on this classification. Deductibility of 2% Trade Discount: The cross objection raised by the respondent was regarding the deductibility of a 2% trade discount in computing the assessable value under Section 4 of the Act. The tribunal analyzed Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Act, which states that trade discounts allowed in wholesale trade practice are not included in the assessable value. The respondent had offered a 2% cash discount, which the tribunal found to be deductible in the assessable value calculation, even if not all purchasers availed the discount. Citing a previous tribunal decision, the tribunal allowed the cross objection, stating that the trade discount should be deducted from the price of goods for determining the assessable value. In conclusion, the tribunal upheld the classification of dealers in Maharashtra into registered and unregistered categories and allowed the deduction of the 2% trade discount in computing the assessable value. The appeal and cross objections were disposed of accordingly, with no further examination needed by the adjudicating authority as per the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).
|