9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt S.R. Raghavan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Smt. R. Bhagya Devi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we note that the appellants had supplied their products to a common buyer viz. M/s. TELCO Ltd. during the respective periods of dispute on payment of duty on assessable values which did not take into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iscount allowed by the assessees to the buyer. Such collection of interest was occasioned by belated remittances of amounts to the bank by M/s. TELCO. In the impugned orders, learned Commissioner included these interest amounts in the assessable value of the goods covered by the respective invoices. Accordingly, differential duty was demanded from the assessees and penalties imposed on them. The p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. We have noticed 2 circulars of the Board, No. 354-81-2000-TRU dated 30-6-2000 and No. 643-34-2002-CX dated 1-7-2002, which clarified the point. Accordingly, the net price of the goods, after cash discount allowed by the seller to the buyer in a case of immediate or reasonably prompt payment of sale price by the latter, must be accepted as the assessable value of the goods inasmuch as such price ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en upheld by the Supreme Court vide 1997 (93) E.L.T. A71. The Tribunal s order has not been placed before us. What appears from the brief report on the Supreme Court s decision is that there was an arrangement between the assessee and their bankers, which had nothing to do with the transaction between the former and their buyer. The facts of the present case are altogether different inasmuch as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lars. 3. It is also noticed that, on a similar set of facts, learned Commissioner (Appeals), Chennai, in Order-in-Appeal No. 56/2005 dated 25-10-2005, took the view that the interest received from the buyer of the goods by their bankers was not to be included in the assessable value of the goods purchased by them from assessee. The appellate Commissioner s order prima facie arrears to have taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
