1987 (11) TMI 203

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....raised on their RT-12 assessment returns for the months of February, 1976 to January, 1977. The demands were raised on account of the following 3 grounds :- (1) Exemption from additional Central Excise duty on samples denied for the period prior to June, 1976: (2) 6-1/4% discount for the 'B' Grade fabrics, as compared to the prices of 'Fresh' fabrics, denied; (3) Cash discount denied. 3. So far as the exemption from additional duty on samples is concerned, the appellants have not placed before us the relevant classification list nor any other proceeding in which they had claimed the said exemption or in which the Assistant Collector had denied them such exemption. However, we find from the assessment memorandum recorded by the Superinte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellants claimed therein the 6-1/4% discount. Without issuing a show cause notice or hearing the appellants, the Assistant Collector passed the following order on 29-11-1975 :- "1. Approved in Pt. IV as the goods are sold through a related person. 2. The value approved should be the highest selling price for the Pt.IV   same description of goods. 3. The goods are differentiated by way of discount and "Normal price" remains the same and deduction from the normal price is not accepted. 1. The approved value should be the value on which the goods are Pt.IV         sold through their different regional offices to any independent wholesale dealer (not related to them). 2. Conditions as s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... bar were very petty. 7. The learned representative of the department stated that the appellants should have filed appeals against each of the price approvals recorded by the Assistant Collector even though all the orders were identically worded and the appellants had filed an appeal against the first such order in the series. He argued that at the stage of assessing the monthly RT 12 Returns under Rule 173-I, the role of the Superintendent was a limited one - to see whether the assessee had adhered to the rates of duty and assessable values as approved by the Assistant Collector in the classification list and the price list or not. If the assessee had not paid the duty according to the Assistant Collector's orders, the Superintendent was ....