9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... offered in those areas of market where the product is new and new technology is to be introduced which is to be accepted by the buyers. To attract the buyers in new market, the additional discount has been given and in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd (2000 (11) TMI 139 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) it is held that a discount is a commercially acceptable measure which may be resorted to by a vendor for a variety of reasons including stock clearance. A price list is really no more than a general quotation. It does not preclude discounts on the listed price. When a discount is permissible commercially, and there is nothing to show that the same would not have been offered to anyone else wishing to buy the old stock, there is no reason why the decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing a reasonable opportunity to the appellant of being heard. All issues are kept open. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants imported goods from their foreign company viz. Peri GmbH, Germany. As the appellants are the related person to their foreign supplier, therefore, the goods imported by them were referred to Special Valuation Cell for valuation purposes. The adjudicating authority held that the transaction value is proper value and assessed the goods. The department was of the view that the importer has received extra discount on the sale price of their foreign supplier which is not justified. Therefore, the said order was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the appellants are related person an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not influenced on these discounts. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. vs. CC, Mumbai reported in 2000(122)ELT 321 (S.C.). 3. On the other hand, the Ld. A.R. reiterated the impugned order and submitted that it is no doubt that the appellants and the foreign supplier are the related persons and they are offering 10% discount to other buyers and offering 20% discount to the appellants which is not fair. Therefore, the impugned order is to be upheld. 4. Heard both sides. Considered the submissions. It is an admitted fact that the appellants are related person to the foreign supplier. As per the discount policy of their foreign supplier, as the product bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
