1998 (5) TMI 384

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri S.N. Ghosh, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. -  Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows :- 1.1 The appellant firm herein entered into two contracts with M/s. India Metal and Ferro Alloys (IMFA). In one Contract dated 6-6-85, a price of Rs. 6,800.00 per M.T. for supply of 600 M.T. of Carbon Electrode Paste (hereinafter referred t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d to be fulfilled and therefore, the discount of Rs. 700.00 per M.T. was proposed to be disallowed and has been disallowed by the adjudicating authority on the aforesaid ground. 1.2. On the plea of limitation made by the appellant-firm before the adjudicating authority, the said authority has found that the appellant firm wilfully suppressed the fact of non-fulfilment of the contracted con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....osition, learned Advocate relies on a Madras High Court's judgment in the case of Standard Electric Appliances v. Superintendent of Central Excise reported in 1986 (23) E.L.T. 302. He further submits that the discount actually given to the party has not been reverted back to the appellant-firm. 3. Opposing the contentions, learned J.D.R., Shri S.N. Ghosh submits that the non-fulfilment of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lment of the Contract. That has not been denied by the appellant-firm that the terms of the Contract have not been fulfilled. Therefore, in our view, the adjudicating authority has correctly denied the benefit of the discount claimed by the appellant-firm, inasmuch as the terms of the Contract were not fulfilled. Therefore, on merits, we do not find much strength in the appellants' case. 5.&ems....