9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant. Smt. R. Bhagya Devi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - Appeal No. 385/2006 is against a demand of differential duty of Rs. 2,65,484/- for the calendar year 2001, while the other appeal is against a demand of differential duty of Rs. 13,98,850/- for the calendar year 2003. The present applications are for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urpose of determining the assessable value of the goods sold from depots in a given calendar year and, accordingly, the assessments were provisional. The original authority, while finalizing the assessments, rejected the assessee's claim for abatement of discounts on equalized basis. It also rejected their claim for similar abatement of turnover tax from the assessable value. Accordingly, the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transaction value" would be Rs. 2.81 lakhs. However, these submissions are not supported by any records duly verified by the department or duly certified by auditor. Hence, at this stage, we are not inclined to accept the above claim of the appellants. The case would fall back upon the question whether the claim of the appellants for abatement, from assessable value, of discounts and turnover tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same is not recoverable from the customer. We are at a loss to understand the logic of equalization of this tax. In the circumstances, we have to hold that the appellants have not made out prima facie case against the demand of duty. They have not pleaded financial hardships either. Nevertheless, in a lenient approach, we are asking them to pre-deposit only a part of the duty demand. Accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
