9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry on 15th May, 2003, it was revealed that the appellants had been supplying to their buyers a free bicycle for lifting the specified quantity of bicycles manufactured by the appellants. However, no excise duty was paid on such bicycles offered free of charge to the dealers. It was also revealed that the bicycles offered free of charge under the scheme were of a model other than those which were supplied to the dealers for sale to the customers. Accordingly, a show cause notice dated 28th November, 2003 came to be issued to the appellants requiring them to show cause against the demand of duty to the tune of Rs. 3,61,975/- on the ground that the discount, so given, was different from the regular quantity discount as the scheme was introduced by way of sale promotion and for enhancing marketability of the product. The proceedings were contested by the appellants without any success. 4. The learned Chartered Accountant appearing for the appellants, drawing our attention to the invoice dated 21st January, 2003 issued by the appellants to a dealer at Indore (Madhya Pradesh) and placing reliance in the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of CCE, Chennai v. Hindustan Lever Ltd., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CCE, Delhi, reported in 2003 (152) E.L.T. A265 (S.C.), the learned DR further submitted that, the law on the point which is sought to be raised is well settled by the said decisions and the case of the appellants is squarely covered by the said decisions. 6. The learned Chartered Accountant for the appellants in rejoinder submitted that, in terms of the scheme for Chattisgarh, a free bicycle was to be supplied to the dealer for every twenty bicycles made available for sale to the customers and, therefore, no fault can be found for supplying two bicycles free of charge to the dealer on providing thirty-eight bicycles for sale to the customer. 7. The show cause notice dated 28th November, 2003 which was issued to the appellants specifically stated thus : On perusal of the letter dated 30-10-2002 issued by Shri D.K. Sharma, Assistant General Manager (Sales) it appears that the Scheme of supply of one Atlas Cycle 22 /24 S/B, D/B, B/K/GR free on lifting of every 20 Cycle was introduced in M.P. Region dealer only for standard Cycle. This type of quantity discount is different from regular quantity discount as the instant scheme was introduced for sale promotion and enhancing m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h. D.K. Sharma AGM (Sales) which was concerned with Scheme of FOC (Free of Cost) it is clear from the letter that on lifting of every 20 nos. of Bicycles 01 (one) Atlas Cycles 22 /24 S/B D/B, B/K/G/R will be given free to the dealer this Scheme was applicable only for Madhya Pradesh region. Under this Scheme the dealers of M.P. region are supplied with Standard Bicycles with different colours sizes having different Code Nos. which is mentioned in our invoices. Further in your notice you have mentioned the case history of PEARL DRINKS LTD. v. COMMISSIONER CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI 2002 (140) E.L.T. UNDER COURT ROOM HIGHLIGHTS (152) E.L.T. (496) (TRI, DEL) CEGEAT NEW DELHI wherein aforesaid company supply one bottle of aerated water free of cost along with one crate, which is not a admissible trade discount, when the bottle supplied free of new Flavour size. We M/s Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd., had not regularly supplied FOC Bicycles but in order to enhance our Marketability now and to compete with other Brand in Cycle Industry we have introduced this Scheme and also informed your deptt., about this scheme time to time through our Documents. We M/s Atlas Cycles (Haryana) L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eply neither the allegation relating to the difference between bicycles supplied free of charge and those supplied for sale to the customers has been disputed or denied, nor there is any specific averment that there was no such difference between those bicycles. This clearly discloses an attempt on the part of the appellants regarding charge levelled against the appellants in the show cause notice. Being so, it is, in fact, too late for the appellants to contend that the authorities did not appreciate the said defence of the appellants. In fact, no such defence has ever been raised in the reply to the show cause notice. 12. Perusal of the copy of the invoice dated 21st January, 2003, apparently, discloses that, the supply was made to a dealer at Indore which is situated in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The contention of the appellants, however, is that, for supply of every twenty bicycles, one bicycle was given free of charge. The invoice, however, discloses supply of only thirty-eight bicycles for sale to the customers and yet there are two bicycles stated to have been supplied free of charge. The description of the bicycles given also discloses that the bicycles which were made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
