TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the packaging - Held that: - reliance was placed in the case of M/s. Biochem Pharmaceutical Industries Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III [2016 (3) TMI 664 - CESTAT MUMBAI], where it was held that quantity discount was correctly claimed by the appellant as the same was claimed at the time of sale of the goods - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 and October 2003. The original authority issued notice dated 27 th February 2004 proposing to recover ₹ 1,92,538/- as the differential duty arising from the allegation that the discount/bonus scheme was not operational in July and September 2003. The demand confirmed thereafter was upheld by the first appellate authority. 2. It is the contention of appellant that section 4(1) (a) of Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise, Mumbai-III [2016 (337) ELT 276 (Tri-Mumbai)] was cited on behalf of the appellant. We notice that it has held therein that 6. We find that this fact is not under dispute that the goods were first cleared from the factory not for sale but as a stock transfer to their depot and from depot the actual sale has taken place. The correct sale value and discount if any, can only be determine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to, or on behalf of, the assessee, by reason of, or in connection with the sale, whether payable at the time of the sale or at any other time, including, but not limited to any amount charged for, or to make provision for, advertising or publicity, marketing and selling organization expenses, storage, outward handling, servicing, warranty, commission or any other matter, but does not include the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
