TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not admissible to the appellant - Held that: - Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Purolator India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III [2015 (8) TMI 1014 - SUPREME COURT], that the transaction value should be known at the time of removal - in the instant case the duty incidents has been passed on to the customers, before 19/01/2004 and the discounted value shall be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 003 to 28/02/2004 at the normal assessable value after payment of appropriate Central Excise duty. The appellant entered into an agreement with M/s U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) for discount of ₹ 450/- per KL on 19/01/2004. The Central Excise duty component involved in said discount was claimed by the appellant for the period from 01/12/2003 to 31/01/2004 as refund through a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said Order-in-Appeal the appellant has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the Id. Counsel for the appellant who has argued that though the agreement was entered into on 19/01/2004 since the agreement was made effective with retrospective date 01/12/2003 and therefore the terms of agreement are made applicable for the entire supply and said discount therefore, was made applicable f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at 2011 (273) E.L.T. 191 (Karnataka) wherein it was held that if the duty was paid at higher rate by assessee and credit notes for same were issued to the buyers and if buyer has not claimed any Cenvat credit of the same, then, it is to be presumed the duty was not passed on to the customers. 4. Heard the Id. D. R. who has argued that Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of P urolator ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 227 (S.C.) that the transaction value should be known at the time of removal. We, therefore, hold that in the instant case the duty incidents has been passed on to the customers, before 19/01/2004 and the discounted value shall be admissible only with effect from 19/01/2004. Therefore, we remand this case back to Original Authority for the period subsequent from 19/01/2004. We also hold that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
