Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1935 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - allowability of trade discounts - HELD THAT:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/S. PUROLATOR INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI – III [2015 (8) TMI 1014 - SUPREME COURT] has held that cash and volume discounts stipulated in agreement between assessee and buyers known at or prior to clearance of the goods is to be deducted from sale price in order to arrive at value of excisable goods and that there is no change in the legal position after amendment of Sec.4 of C.Ex Act - the appellant has rightly availed abatement of the discounts involved and the Commissioner has erred in disallowing the same - the demand of duty and interest confirmed and penalties imposed upon the appellant are unsustainable. Whether the discounts were known to the Department as well as to the buyers before removal of finished goods? - HELD THAT:- It is recorded by the Commissioner himself in the order that the discount and the nature of discounts had been duly disclosed by the appellant to all concerned including the department and the price declarations containing the respective percentage of such discounts, have also been duly filed. It is also seen that abatements have been claimed by the appellant in respect of each of the discounts - issue decided in favor of appellant. Whether such discounts were actually passed on to customers/buyers - HELD THAT:- From the said invoices/bills we also find that the appellant during the relevant period, had claimed discounts of exactly the quantities thereof passed on to the customers. The finding in the impugned order that the appellant had claimed abatement of ₹ 4,04,77,213.47 which had not been passed on the customer is therefore unsustainable. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- Since we have decided the appeal is favor of the appellant on merit, we have not gone into the aspect of limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|