<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1997 (9) TMI 267 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87809</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi upheld the Collector (Appeals) decision to allow the trade discount claimed by a manufacturer of aerated waters. The Tribunal rejected the disallowance of the discount by the Assistant Collector, emphasizing that the practice of quantifying discounts after sales to retailers did not invalidate the claim. It also dismissed arguments of lack of correlation between the manufacturer and wholesalers&#039; sales, as all goods eventually reached retailers. Allegations of sales to non-approved canteens were also dismissed due to lack of evidence. The department&#039;s appeals challenging the discount allowance were ultimately dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:02:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124875" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 267 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87809</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi upheld the Collector (Appeals) decision to allow the trade discount claimed by a manufacturer of aerated waters. The Tribunal rejected the disallowance of the discount by the Assistant Collector, emphasizing that the practice of quantifying discounts after sales to retailers did not invalidate the claim. It also dismissed arguments of lack of correlation between the manufacturer and wholesalers&#039; sales, as all goods eventually reached retailers. Allegations of sales to non-approved canteens were also dismissed due to lack of evidence. The department&#039;s appeals challenging the discount allowance were ultimately dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87809</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>