TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (5) TMI 130
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Water Treatment Chemicals classifiable under sub-heading 3823.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and assessable to duty on ad valorem basis. 2. The dispute in the said appeal relates to the price lists filed by the appellant firm during the period from 6-10-1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore, deduction on this count was not permissible. 3. The appellant's stand before the lower authorities was that they are selling the chemicals to various consumers and buyers situated throughout the country in different regions. A fixed uniform price is charged from all these buyers irrespective of the place of delivery. Even when the goods are delivered at far-off places at the customer'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the total discount offered in particular period was claimed as deduction from the price of the said goods which should have been allowed by the lower authorities. 5. The average of freight and discount was initially claimed by the appellant firm from the price list on estimated basis subject to adjustment after knowing the actuals for the relevant year. After auditing the books of accou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(S.C.)] has approved the concept of average freight and has held the deduction on account of the same as admissible. The reasoning of the adjudicating authority that as the price at the factory gate was ascertainable, the deduction of freight was not permissible is against the law laid down by the Apex Court in the above decision. Accordingly, we hold that the appellant firm was entitled to the de....