Trade discount valuation requires full consideration of declarations and evidence before rejecting deduction and remanding for fresh adjudication.

Material evidence central to the valuation dispute, including price declaration, marketing pattern declaration, invoices and the Chartered Accountant's statement on pass-on of trade discount, was not examined in depth. The finding that no discount had been passed on was based on selected invoices alone, without discussion of the legal position on deduction of discount where it was not separately reflected in the price declaration. As the controversy turned on evidence going to the root of valuation, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after considering all relevant materials and contentions.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the impugned order could be sustained when the Commissioner had not considered the price declaration, marketing pattern declaration, invoices and Chartered Accountant's statement concerning pass-on of trade discount, and whether the matter required remand for fresh decision.

Issue (i): Whether the impugned order could be sustained when the Commissioner had not considered the price declaration, marketing pattern declaration, invoices and Chartered Accountant's statement concerning pass-on of trade discount, and whether the matter required remand for fresh decision.

Analysis: The relevant documents and submissions bearing on the core controversy regarding admissibility of trade discount were not examined in depth. The finding that no discount had been passed on was based only on selected invoices, while the record also contained material such as the Chartered Accountant's certification and the declarations filed by the appellant. There was no discussion of the legal position on deduction of discount where it was not separately incorporated in the price declaration. Since the issue turned on material evidence going to the root of the valuation dispute, a fresh consideration by the original authority was necessary.

Conclusion: The matter was required to be remanded for a fresh decision after considering all relevant materials and contentions.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the dispute was sent back for reconsideration on merits by the adjudicating authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where material evidence and submissions central to valuation are not considered, the proper course is remand for de novo adjudication.

---