Distributors' discount abatement requires buyer communication at removal; insufficient evidence led to rejection of the claim.

Entitlement to abatement of distributors' discount in provisional assessment of lubricants depended on the discount being communicated to buyers at the time of removal of the goods. The evidence produced was found insufficient to show that the discount had been made known in the manner required to qualify for deduction. The claim for abatement was therefore rejected by CESTAT.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to abatement of distributors' discount in the provisional assessment of lubricants cleared in 1997.

Analysis: The discount was required to be made known to the buyers at the time of removal of the goods. The evidence placed was not found sufficient to establish that the discount had been communicated to the buyers in the manner necessary to qualify for abatement.

Conclusion: The claim for abatement of the distributors' discount was rejected.

---