2000 (5) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....kar, Member (T)]. - The appellant manufactures, among other products, glazed ceramic tiles. In arriving at the assessable value of such tiles, the appellant deducted from their sale price a 3% cash discount. The appellant stated that such cash discount was available to a customer making payment for the goods within five days from the date of invoice. The notice was issued in May, 1998 proposing di....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....contentions. He found that about 40% of buyers availing the cash discount were not entitled to it because they had made payment beyond five days from the date of invoice. The discount, he said, therefore was not permissible, as a deduction. He also found that the extended period of limitation was applicable and confirmed the duty payable and imposed penalty under section 11AC of the Act. Hence thi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....preme Court's judgment in GOI v. MRF Ltd. - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 433 had come to the same conclusion 4.The departmental representative contends that the discount is admissible only in respect of those sales where it has been actually availed of. The appellant's action in claiming the discount in cases where payments were received beyond five days from the date of invoice it amounts to discriminatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ust be extended. He said the classification should have been allowed irrespective of whether each customer availed of the said discount. This ratio has been followed by the Bombay High Court and other high courts in the judgments listed above. An appeal against one of these judgments in Goodlass Nerolac v. CCE has dismissed on merits by the Supreme Court as reported in 1994 (73) E.L.T. A 58. The d....