2024 (12) TMI 526 - AT - Central Excise

Cash discount in invoice must be deducted from excisable goods value regardless of buyer actually availing discount

CESTAT Ahmedabad set aside duty demand on cash discount declared in invoice. Following SC precedent in Purolator India Limited and tribunal's own decision ... Levy of duty on cash discount which is declared in the invoice even though in some cases the discount was not availed by the buyer and the same was not passed on - HELD THAT:- The issue in hand is no longer res integra. In view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Purolator India Limited [2015 (8) TMI 1014 - SUPREME COURT], the issue in the appellant’s own case has been decided by this Tribunal in M/S. GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD VERSUS C.C. E-BHARUCH [2019 (8) TMI 869 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] where it was held that 'cash discount which is not at or prior to clearance of goods being contained in agreement of sale between assessee and buyers must, therefore, be deducted from sale price in order to know the value of excisable goods at time.' Thus, the issue is no longer res Integra, accordingly the demand of duty is not sustainable. The impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed. Issues:- Duty on cash discount declared in the invoice even if not availed by the buyer.Detailed Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad addressed the issue of whether the appellant is liable to pay duty on cash discounts declared in the invoice, even if the buyer did not avail of the discount. The appellant argued that a previous Tribunal order had set aside a similar demand based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Purolator India Limited. The revenue, represented by the Superintendent, reiterated the findings of the impugned order, leading to a thorough consideration by the Tribunal.The Tribunal examined the case in light of the Purolator India Limited judgment and previous Tribunal orders. The appellant, a manufacturer of paper products, had a cash discount policy for prompt payments. The issue revolved around whether the cash discount not availed by buyers should be considered part of the transaction value for excise duty calculation. The appellant contended that duty should only be paid on the discounted price actually paid or payable at the time of sale, excluding unavailed discounts. The Tribunal analyzed the definition of 'transaction value' under the Central Excise Act, emphasizing that any amount payable by the buyer, even after the sale, could be included in the transaction value.The Tribunal delved into the interpretation of the transaction value concept, considering the timing of discount application and payment. It was established that if a buyer failed to avail the discount due to delayed payment, the discount amount became payable, thus forming part of the assessable value for duty calculation. However, the Tribunal noted the Purolator India Limited judgment, which emphasized that the transaction value should be determined at the time of clearance of goods, and any discounts agreed upon before or after clearance should be considered. Therefore, the cash discount, not availed before or at the clearance of goods, should be deducted from the sale price to determine the excisable goods' value.Ultimately, the Tribunal, following the judicial discipline and the precedent set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Purolator India Limited case, set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal. The decision was based on aligning with the Supreme Court's interpretation of transaction value and the treatment of discounts in excise duty calculations. Consequently, the demand for duty on unavailed cash discounts was deemed unsustainable, leading to the allowance of the appeal and the setting aside of the impugned order.