9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (12) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals relate to the trade discount. This common ground is first taken up for discussion. 3. The trade discount which has been treated as part of sale price amounts to Rs. 1,03,790.42 for asst. yr. 1969-70 Rs. 3,81,649.75 for asst. yr. 1970-71, and Rs. 2,14,084.82 for asst. yr. 1972-73. The amount is allowed as a deduction from the catalogued sale price in pursuance of a distribution agreement with the appellant has with its distributors. The relevant clause relating to the discount in one of the standard contracts made is as under : Discount : XI(a). The company shall allow the distributor the following discounts off the ruling trade price from time to time published by the Company of its products, purchased by him or sold by the Company to his customers at the Distributor s request. PVC water pipes and fittings Upto 30-6-71 From 1-7-71 For sizes from 16 mm upto and including 75 mm 20% 20% For sizes from 90 mm upto and above 10% 20% PVC Electrical conduits and Fittings . . Wavin Standard Electrical conduits 30% 30% General purpose conduits 30% 30% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . . . . 1,713.00 . . . . Discount at 30% 513.90 . . . . . 1,199.10 . . . . Sales tax at 7% 83.94 . . . . Packing Forwarding at 1% 17.13 . . . . . 1,300.17" These are the facts relevant for the determination of the issue before us. On these facts the assessing authority was of the view that the said discount does not satisfy the requirement of the definition of the sale price vide s. 2(h) of the CST Act, which reads as under : "Sale price" means the amount payable to a dealer as consideration for the sale of any goods, less any sum allowed as cash discount according to the practice normally prevailing in the trade, but inclusive of any sum charge for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time or before the delivery thereof other than the cost of freight or delivery or the cost of installation in cases where such cost is separately charged" It may be seen from the definition that the cash discount can be reduced from the sale price w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the same. There is no reason why the sale price should be different just because the appellant is in the habit of billing the sale at catalogue price and allowing the deduction at pre-agreed rates and calling it discount . In this view of the matter it is not necessary to consider the deduction to be a discount at all. This is the view taken in T.A. 1197/74 dt. 23rd April, 1975 and in many other cases. In the said decision we had considered the case law at length. We do not therefore, consider it necessary to go into them again. Even if the claim is treated as a claim for deduction from sale price as discount, we have no reason to assume that it does not satisfy the requirement under s. 2(h) of the CST Act. In fact even turnover discounts allowed in pursuance of an agreement prior to the same had been considered to be deductible by the Tribunal on the ground that the agreed sale price itself is not price after turnover discount in T.A. 462/72 dt. 4th March, 1973. The High Court of Madras also confirmed such a view in T.C. 62/72 dt. 11th March, 1974. The view taken here has been taken by us in a number of other cases also. The appellant is entitled to succeed on this ground. 6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... position and had wrongly assumed that the assessing authority dropped the proposal assessed at 10 per cent. We have seen with reference to notice issued on 29th Jan., 1971 and 28th Sept., 1974 the turnover on which the concessional rate was refused was Rs. 1,29,629.95 in the final assessment order and this includes the disputed turnover of Rs. 23,133.75. We also had these figures checked by the State Representative. We have also gone through the C forms filed in pages 195 to 200 in the assessment file. Since these C forms were not considered by the assessing authority, we should remand the appellant s claim back with a direction that the concessional rate may be allowed for these C forms if they are in order, since these forms were filed before him prior to assessment. If however the forms are not found acceptable for any reason the appellant should be given an opportunity to rectify the same. With this observation we remand the matter. 8. In T.A. 538/75 relating to asst. yr. 1970-71 the State Representative had orally asked for enhancement on the ground that the order of the AAC of AAC s order in paragraph 6 is erroneous. The relevant portion is as under: "As regards next dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
