9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellate Commissioner made on 15th July, 1999 dismissing the appeal and confirming the order of the Asstt. Commissioner by holding that the wholesale dealers in different regions and cities constitute different class of buyers and accordingly different prices charged from the wholesale dealers in different regions, would be acceptable as assessable value. 2. The respondents are engaged in the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew Application, it was contended that the Asstt. Commissioner should have taken into consideration that an appeal was filed against the order-in-original in other case which was pending for decision. 3. It is evident from the provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act that, where, in accordance with the normal practice of the wholesale trade in the goods, such goods are sold by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment, in this context, submitted that in the case of Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. CCE, Pune, reported in 2005 (181) E.L.T. 299 (S.C.), the Supreme Court has observed that, there must be some intelligible criteria for treating the benefited persons differently from others and that discount has to be as per the normal practice of the wholesale trade in such goods and cannot be given on extraneous con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wholesale dealers of different regions on extraneous consideration or on irrational basis. The assertion in the show cause notice, that all wholesale dealers in India, wherever they must be located, should be sold at a uniform price, flies in the face of proviso (i) to Section 4(1)(a) of the said Act and is contrary to the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kirloskar Brother ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
