9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee, it was not a permissible deduction and it had to be reloaded in the price of the excisable goods - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/695/2003-DB - 21036/2017 - Dated:- 2-5-2017 - Shri SS Garg, Judicial Member And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Mr. Sudhakar, CA, For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, AR, For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal has been filed by the Department against the impugned order dated 31.3.2003 whereby the Commissioner (A) has set aside Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal of the assessee. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that respondents are manufacturers of footwear falling under Chapter Heading 64 of Central Excise Tariff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the observation of the Commissioner (A) in the impugned order that when wholesale price was available, the same had to be applied to retail sales and that a different assessable value could not be worked out for retail sale. He further submitted that the present dispute is not about adoption of wholesale price for sales made to Retail Distribution Centres (RDCs). The dispute is ab the further deductions claimed by the assessee from the wholesale price to arrive at the cum-duty price and assessable value i.e., extra trade discount and additional trade discount which are conditional discounts, allowed to the wholesalers based on their performance. He further submitted that the Commissioner (A) has wrongly relied upon the contention o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces by way of business expediency, the manufacturer offers him a special trade discount, it cannot be said that it is not in accordance with normal practice of wholesale trade. It is not in dispute that Ponds (l) Limited has not refunded such discount on any account. Therefore, it satisfies the requirement of clause (ii) of Section 4(4)(d) of the Act. Learned counsel for the appellant in this connection invited our attention to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. Limited v. Union of India Ors. - 1980 (6) Excise Law Times 397. The Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court consisting of P.O. Desai and G.T. Nanavati, JJ., interpreting the scope of Section 4 of the Act laid down that Section 4 of the Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... insofar as period of limitation applicable herein and reloading of the purchase price by the notional value of interest on advances made by wholesale buyer Ponds (l) Limited to the assessee is concerned and to that extent Assistant Collector's order will stand untouched. However, to the extent of the disallowance of the trade discount offered to the wholesale buyers Ponds (l) Limited by the assessee, the decision of the Tribunal is set aside and accordingly the original order passed by the Assistant Collector to that effect will also stand set aside. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. 6. By following the ratio of the decisions of the apex court, we are of the considered opinion that ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
