Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The additional discount of 8-10% given by the appellant to JEPL was held to be a genuine trade discount and not a "Commission" disguised as a discount to suppress the value. The CESTAT held that when the invoice is issued showing separate discounts, one payable to the distributor/dealer and the other to the purchaser, the former is considered a "Commission" and inadmissible. However, when the distributor/dealer purchases on their own account, such a discount is a normal trade discount and admissible. The 55% discount (including the additional 8-10%) passed on by the appellant to JEPL for their own purchases was held to be an admissible trade discount and could not be considered a "Commission".
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The additional discount of 8-10% given by the appellant to JEPL was held to be a genuine trade discount and not a "Commission" disguised as a discount to suppress the value. The CESTAT held that when the invoice is issued showing separate discounts, one payable to the distributor/dealer and the other to the purchaser, the former is considered a "Commission" and inadmissible. However, when the distributor/dealer purchases on their own account, such a discount is a normal trade discount and admissible. The 55% discount (including the additional 8-10%) passed on by the appellant to JEPL for their own purchases was held to be an admissible trade discount and could not be considered a "Commission".
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
