TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Court decision in the case of CCE, Pune v. SKF India Ltd. (2009 (7) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT ), we decline to answer reference as to whether, it is necessary to refer the matter to five Member Bench or otherwise. The appellant is at liberty to pursue the appeal before the learned Division Bench on merit and other issues, to canvass all points on the basis of binding decisions. Registry is directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bers Bench to consider as to whether the issue needs to be referred to a five Members Bench or otherwise. 2. In the present appeal, the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Float Glass. They were selling the goods at factory gate and offered cash discount to the customers for making payment promptly. Prior to October, 2006, the appellant was allowing cash discount, and it was deducted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding that in the case of Lucas TVS Ltd. (supra), another Larger Bench of the Tribunal, had disagreed with the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Arvind Mills Ltd. (supra). 3. The learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant fairly submits that in the case of Lucas TVS Ltd. (supra), the three Member Bench doubted the correctness of the decision of Arvind Mills Ltd. (supra) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decisions. The learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue contended that the present appeal can be decided on the basis of various decisions without any reference. 4. Considering the submissions of both the sides and particularly that there is no need to refer the matter to five Member Bench in view of the Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CCE, Pune v. SKF India Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
