2015 (9) TMI 877

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short, 'the Rules'). On 13-2-1995, an order of provisional assessment was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise under Rule 9B of the Rules. It is stated that after the said order was passed, the appellant supplied the product to the wholesale distributors, and trade discounts were given to promote sales. 3. In the context of passing final order of assessment, the appellant submitted price declarations as required under Rule 173C of the Rules and RT 12 returns under Rule 173(4). On a verification of the facts and figures furnished by the appellant, the Deputy Commissioner passed an order dated 31-5-2002, taking the view that the discounts claimed by the appellant are allowable. Based ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Bangalore (for short, 'the CESTAT') against the order dated 12-3-2003 passed by the Commissioner. The CESTAT allowed the appeal through order 12-5-2004 relying upon the order passed by its predecessor in S. Kumar Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore [2002 (143) E.L.T. 641]. The said order is challenged in this appeal. 5. Heard Sri S. Dwarakanath, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri V. Gopala Krishna Gokhale, learned counsel for the respondent. 6. Section 4 of the Act, as it stood at the relevant point of time, provided for the manner in which the excise duty is to be levied. Ascertainment of the value of the manufactured goods is one of the important steps. The provision took into account, not only the cost ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... different from those of the present case. The manufacturer was found to have collected the amount, representing the excise duty and when the question of refund on the basis of an order passed in the appeal arose, the plea as to unjust enrichment was taken into account. Once the manufacturer has collected the component of excise duty, refund on account of the adjudication at a subsequent stage was found to be linked with the feasibility of passing on the benefit to the end customer. Such a situation does not obtain in the instant case. The trade discount was given to a wholesaler and not in the course of any retail sale. Further, it was paid at the prescribed point of sale, namely, at the stage of removal of goods from the place of manufact....