TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (7) TMI 406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent : Shri Amand Shah, Addl. Commissioner (AR) PER : P R Chandrasekharan The appeal and Stay application are directed against Order-in-Appeal no. 26/MCH/AC/GVC/2013 dated 31/12/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai. 2. The facts relevant to the case are as follows:- 2.1 The appellant, M/s Autonics Automation India Pvt. Ltd. are importers of office automation equipment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unrelated buyers were no longer getting 35% of the discount from the list price and, therefore, it is a discriminatory discount, which was given only to the appellants and such discriminatory discount is not acceptable and, therefore, it should be added to the transaction price to arrive at the assessable value. Hence, the appellant is before us. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gn supplier to the appellant is without any logic or basis and, therefore, he pleads for allowing the appeal. 5. The ld. Addl. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue while reiterating the findings of the lower appellate authority submits that after the appointment of the appellant, there are no imports by unrelated buyers and, therefore, there cannot be a comparison between the prices of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itself will be defeated. The unrelated importers were getting a discount of 35% earlier. It, therefore, logically follows that after the appointment of distributor, he would also eligible for the same discount earlier given to unrelated distributors. The assessing officer has come to the conclusion that 35% discount from the price list given to the appellant is a normal trade discount and it is no....