Back
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
U.L. BHAT, K. SANKARARAMAN, JJ.
Multimetals Ltd. -Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur -Respondent
Final Order No. 2167/97-A Appeal No. E/3448/91-A, 2167 of 1997, E/3448 of 1991
Decided On : 18-12-1997
K. Srivastava
Per Justice U.L. Bhat :
Appellant is absent in spite of notice of hearing but has sent a request for disposal of the appeal on merits. We have heard Shri K. Srivastava, SDR and perused the papers.
2. The dispute arose in connection with three refund claims filed by the appellant seeking refund of excess duty paid on the element of alleged trade discount. Refund claims were dismissed by the Assistant Collector and the dismissal was confirmed by the Collector (Appeals). Hence the present appeal.
3. There is no dispute that this discount was not granted to all buyers but only to three among the buyers. Discount was actually granted by credit notes long after the supplies were made. Lower authorities took the view that the discount was not known to the buyers at the time of clearance and was not admissible to all buyers and was granted only after subsequent negotiation. There is no evidence of trade practice for grant of trade discount and as such discount was not deductible. This view is not accepted by the appellant.
4. It is not disputed that the contracts did not provide for discount. According to the appellant, after contracts were entered into there were negotiations which resulted in appellants agreeing to give discount. There is no case put forward for the appellant that this discount was available to all buyers similarly situated. No trade discount will be admissible for deduction unless the facility is available to all buyers. In this view, the rejection of the claim for deduction of the discount is sustainable. We find no ground to interfere and accordingly dismiss the appeal.
