TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to say that benefit of reduced price are being passed on to the ultimate customers and therefore, there is no question of unjust enrichment. In the present case, it can be seen that though the appellant assessee has charged the price of ₹ 2953/- inclusive of excise duty from their buyer, further his dealer after receiving the trade/ quantity discount has sold the same product at the reduced rate of ₹ 2,888/- to his customers. Thus it can be seen that the benefit of discount offered to the dealers by the manufacturers assessee has been ultimately been passed on to the ultimate customers. From the financial statement of the assessee also, it can be seen that for financial year 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 wherein under the head ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arket. As per the marketing policy of the appellant, they provide various types of quantity discount to the dealers on the periodic basis and such discounts are properly notified to the dealers in the beginning of each quarter of the financial year. In all the cases, initially the appellant paid central excise duty at the time of clearance from its manufacturing plant on the standard price at which such tyres were sold from the depots to the dealers. Once the dealer has achieved the required quantity sale of the tyres, the quantity discount is provided to them by issuing credit notes to the dealers of discount amount for which the dealer becomes entitled on the basis of quantity of tyres sold by him during particular quarter. 2. The appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assed down to their buyers. It has also been contended that since the benefit of reduced price has been passed on to the subsequent buyer in the form of reduced price and therefore, the burden of excise duty has not been being passed down to the customers and the burden of excess payment of central Excise duty on the discounted amount from the transactional value from the initial transactional value is being borne by the appellant assessee himself. It has further been argued that as per the books of accounts of the appellant, the excise duty paid in excess (on discounted amounts) is being treated by them as receivable from the Revenue department in their profit and loss accounts as well as balance sheet. 3. It has also been contended tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de discount, quantity discounts given by them has also been passed down to the further customers by their dealers and therefore, there is no question of unjust enrichment and the benefit of reduced price has also been passed on to the ultimate customers of their product. 5. Learned Departmental Representative has reiterated the finding of the Order in Appeal. 6. We have heard both the sides. We find that this issue has also came up before this Tribunal in the appellant-assessee s own case for the previous period reported as Final Order No. 51950-51951/2015-Ex(DB) dated 4.6.2015 wherein the department was in appeal and it has been held on the same issue by this Tribunal that in this particular business model of the appellant assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und in his books of accounts which also proves the transparency in the transaction of the assessee. In view of the above, we are of the view that the burden of duty has not been passed down to the customers by the appellant assessee and same has been borne by the appellant assessee themselves and therefore, they are certainly entitled for refund of excess duty excess paid by them on the discount amounts returned by them to the dealers in the form of credit notes. While confirming the above opinion, we also take shelter of Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras vs. Addison Co. Ltd. [ 2016 (339) ELT 177 (SC)] wherein it was observed as under:- 36. Except for a factual dispute about the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
