SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

G.P.AGARWAL, P.C.JAIN
R. R. Paints – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.S. Dave, Mahadev Rajan,G.V. Naik

ORDER

P.C. Jain, Member (T)

1. These batches of appeals involve the issues whether the following discounts or deductions claimed by the appellants from their FOR destination prices of various products manufactured by them are permissible or not :-

(i) Average Freight

(ii) Cash/Regular Payment Discount (R.P.D.)

(iii) Turn-over Discount and

(iv) Central Sales Tax

First three deductions referred to above are common to all the 13 appeals. The last deduction claimed on account of Central Sales Tax is common to the last mentioned batch of 11 appeals.

2. It is apparent from the impugned order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay that he has merely endorsed the order passed by the lower authority, namely the Assistant Collector. Therefore, in order to examine the reasons as to why the various deductions as claimed by the appellants have been disallowed, we shall have to examine the reasons given by the Assistant Collector of Customs.

3. Before a detailed examination of the various claims made by the appellants is made it is necessary to set out in brief the sale pattern of the appellants as narrated by them and not controverted by the respondent. Under the provisions of Rule 173-C of the Centr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top