TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be known to the trade/wholesale buyer prior to the removal of goods - Merely because the appellants did not produce any written agreement, it cannot be said that the trade discount is not known to the buyer at the time of removal of goods. Such discounts are usually given under mutual understanding between parties - appellants are eligible for deduction of trade discount for damaged goods - a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods cannot be deducted from the assessable value and issued a Show Cause Notice proposing to demand differential duty of ₹ 2,31,405/-. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the duty demand. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the Ld. Counsel, Shri H.P.Kamada submitted that the issue whether the appellants are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He stressed that the appellant has not established that there has been practice of giving trade discount and that no agreement has been produced to establish the case of the appellants that they have been giving trade discount for damage of the goods. 4. We have heard the submissions made by both sides. 5. On perusal of records we find th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rely because the appellants did not produce any written agreement, it cannot be said that the trade discount is not known to the buyer at the time of removal of goods. Such discounts are usually given under mutual understanding between parties. Further, we find that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the appellant s own case as stated supra. Following the same, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
