9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is without any basis - Held That:- There is no error in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) giving adjustment for difference in commercial level to the extent of 5% as the third party imports are at actual user level whereas goods imported by the subsidiary are at distributor level. Decided against assessee. - C/358/2004 - Final Order No. 1085/2011 - Dated:- 7-9-2011 - Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be given and in such cases 50% of the granted discount will be deducted from the agent's commission. Thus when the goods are supplied without discount on price list to third party customers, the agent gets commission which is remitted to him and in case a discount is given, the agent gets a different commission. Both the authorities below have held that the importer and the supplier are relate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ependent buyer after giving due considerations for difference in quantity and commercial available. There is no error in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) giving adjustment for difference in commercial level to the extent of 5% as the third party imports are at actual user level whereas goods imported by the subsidiary are at distributor level; both related importer and the independent impor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rious services rendered, and if the discount difference minus the adjustment is disallowed, then value charged to related buyer gets enhanced to the extent of the excess discount difference minus the adjustment. 4. The decision of the Apex Court in Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd. Vs Union of India and Others [1984 (17) E.L.T. 607(S.C.)], relied upon by the assessees, is not applicable in the context ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... company and there are no sales to independent buyers by the overseas supplier without involvement of the appellants where similar levels of discounts have been offered. 5. In the light of the above discussion, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order and, accordingly, uphold the same and reject the appeal. (Operative part of the order was pronounced in open court on 7.9.2011) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
