Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Enkay (India) Rubber Co. vs Cce on 16 June, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1999(80)ECR826(TRI.-DELHI)
ORDER K. Sankararaman, Member (T)
1. Appellant had been selling his goods to buyers situated in different zones at different prices by offering varying rates of discounts. The varying rates of discounts were disallowed by the departmental authorities and the lowest discount applied. The decision of the Assistant Collector having been upheld by the Collector (Appeals), the present appeal has been filed.
2. Arguing the case of the appellant, Shri J.S. Agarwal, learned Counsel stated that the issue of different prices to buyers in different zones has been decided in a number of cases. He referred to the Tribunal decision in Shriram Food and Fertilizers Ltd. which decision has been upheld by the Supreme Court by dismissal of the appeal filed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi. The Tribunal decision in question relied upon an earlier decision of the Tribunal Goramal Hariram and a judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Rayon Industries v. UOI .
3. In view of the submissions made by Shri Agarwal citing the earlier decisions on the subject, Shri M. AH, JDR left the matter for decision by the Bench.
4. The issue stands concluded by the Tribunal decisions and the judgment of the Delhi High Court. The Tribunal decision in Shriram Food and Fertilizers Ltd.-.had also been challenged by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi before the Supreme Court leading to the dismissal. In the circumstances, we find that the Collector (Appeals) erred in upholding the adjudication order which had disallowed the varying rates of discounts. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeal allowed.
5. While we have held on merits that the varying rates of discounts offered to wholesalers situated in different zones is admissible on merits, consequential action in this regard as a result of allowing the higher discounts for certain cases would require decision in the light of the provisions of Section 11B(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The matter may be dealt with by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner in the light of the aforesaid provisions.
Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.