9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lers. Duty on those goods was paid by M/s. Onida Savak Ltd. on the wholesale price charged from those dealers. After April, 1994, they changed the marketing pattern. Entire CTVs and washing machines manufactured were sold to M/s. Adonis India Ltd. who, in turn, sold the sets in wholesale to the dealers. M/s. Onida Savak Ltd. paid excise duty on the sale price charged by them from M/s. Adonis India Ltd. The price realized from M/s. Adonis India Ltd. was less compared to the prices realized by M/s. Onida Savak Ltd. prior to April, 1994 when they sold the goods to the dealers. Consequently, show cause notice was issued demanding differential duty of Rs. 1,76,79,378/- in relation to colour television sets sold during the period from April, 1994 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se trade discount and cash discount offered by M/s. Adonis India Ltd. to dealers should have been deducted from the amount found by the Commissioner as the assessable value of the goods sold. Learned counsel also disputed the stand taken by the commissioner that M/s. Adonis India Ltd. cannot have an independent existence other than that of M/s. Onida Savak Ltd. This latter argument regarding the connection between M/s. Onida Savak Ltd. and M/s. Adonis India Ltd. was not seriously perused by the learned counsel before us. So, the question with which we are concerned in this appeal is whether the Commissioner was justified in accepting the price declared by M/s. Adonis India Ltd. for the goods to be the valued for assessment under the Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal, he found that cash discount and trade discount were, in fact, being offered by M/s. Adonis India Ltd. to the dealers and majority of the dealers were availing of those benefits. That report was supplemented by report, dated 13-11-1997. That report covers the entire period taken in the show cause notice, namely, April, 1994 to 30th September, 1995. The cash discount and trade discount were being availed of by the trade and the trade was aware of these discounts prior to the completion of the contract under which the goods were sold. The actual trade discount which was extended to the dealers, according to the Commissioner, could not be found out because M/s. Adonis India Ltd. were selling goods manufactured not only by M/s. Onida Savak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. In the case of trade discount, actual amount of discount passed on to dealers must be given credit to in finding out assessable value. This exercise should be undertaken by the Commissioner and the differential duty claimed from M/s. Onida Savak Ltd. While doing so, if M/s. Adonis India/M/s. Onida Savak are legally entitled to any other deductions as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court and this Tribunal, benefit of that deduction must also be extended to the parties. In view of this conclusion arrived at by us, the differential duty will come to a lesser amount compared to the original demand which has been confirmed, by the impugned order. Since the entire facts were not properly taken into consideration and the correct law app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
