TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (11) TMI 242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er : R. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - The aforesaid 18 Stay Applications have been filed on behalf of the applicants covering a duty amount of Rs. 41,82,238/-which is the amount not paid and in respect of which Stay Applications have been moved. 2. Shri E.P. Bharucha, the learned advocate on behalf of the appellant stated that 53 orders were passed on their Price Lists by the Asstt. Collector disal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave made the deposits. However in the case covered by the Stay Applications, they have a prima facie case and hence they have moved the Stay Application. 3. First of all dealing with the Handling charges, he contended that these handling charges of Rs. 2/- per ton was specifically allowed under the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Misc. Petition Nos. 30 and 31 of 1976 dated 8-2-1980, wherein ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h, on account of which there was a glut in the market. In order to liquidate the stock, they gave the special discount of 350/- per M.Ton. This was given uniformly to all distributors and also in respect of consignee account distributors. He also took us through the relevant circulars to show that this discount was uniformly given to all and even the consignee account distributors have passed on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce the decision has to be viewed in the context of the latest decision of the Supreme Court. As regards Stock liquidation discount, he contended that removal to consignee account distributors is not actually a sale. So also removal for captive consumption. Hence the discount is available only in respect of direct sales to distributors and not in respect of removals involving no sales. He therefore....