Back
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
U.L. BHAT, K. SANKARARAMAN, JJ.
Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh -Appellant
Versus
Metro Tyres Ltd. -Respondent
Final Order No. 2130/97-A Appeal No. E/3109/91-A, 2130 of 1997, E/3109 of 1991
Decided On : 15-12-1997
M. Ali
Per Justice U.L. Bhat :
Respondent is absent in spite of notice. There is no representation and no request for adjournment. We have heard Shri M. Ali, JDR for the appellant.
2. Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of tyres and tubes, was removing the goods from the factory to the sales depots at different places. Price list filed during the relevant period did not claim deduction of cash discount or prompt payment discount. After payment of duty in respect of the period from 1.10.84 to 31.12.84 and 1.1.85 to 15.3.85 respondent filed two refund claims seeking refund of the duty on the cash discount element. Assistant Collector rejected the claims on the ground that no cash discount had been paid at the time of removal of the goods at the factory gate and same had not been disclosed in the price list. The Collector (Appeals) reversed this order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. The department being aggrieved has filed this appeal.
3. Appeal memorandum shows that all the goods manufactured by the respondent were being removed to the sales depots and sold from there to buyers. One ground urged is that no cash discount was allowed at the factory gate. That is because the sales were effected only at the depots. There is no specific case that the cash discount was not known to the trade or was not allowable to all buyers also satisfy the condition prescribed. The other ground urged is the failure to seek deduction of the cash discount in the price list. This cannot stand in the way of refund, if the facts pleaded are otherwise true. The department has no case that the facts pleaded are not true.
4. In the circumstances, the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) was correct and we dismiss the appeal.
