CCE Vs. PACE MARKETING SPECIALITIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent M/s. Pace Marketing Specialities Ltd. manufacture adhesives, which are liable to Central Excise Duty under Chapter Sub -Heading 3506 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. The duty is on ad -valorem basis. The appellants give a cash discount of 4% to buyers who make prompt payment i.e. within 5 to 7 days of delivery. This discount was not given to buyers who fail to make payment within the stipulated time. All the same, deduction of the cash discount was claimed while making payment of duty in all cases. Similarly, appellants claimed coin discount on the ground that the value of the coin kept inside each consignment was required to be deducted to determine the assessable value of the goods. The central excise authorities issued show cause notice holding that the deductions claimed by the appellants in respect of cash discount and coin discount were not eligible deductions from sale price and that these amounts should also form part of the value of the goods for the purpose of payment of duty. Demand was confirmed by the jurisdictional Dy. Commissioner vide his adjudication Order No. 21/2002. The respondent went in appeal to the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Ghaziabad. The Commissioner allowed their appeal vide Order -in -Appeal No. 46 -CE/GZB dated 7.2.2003 noticing that the Customs, Excise Tribunal had decided the issues in favour of the assessee in their appeal No. E/815/2002 -A by Final Order No. 3/2000 NB.A dated 10.1.2003. The present appeal has been filed against that order of Order -in -Appeal at the direction of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad.

(2.) THE ground taken in the appeal is that the cash discount in question is not passed on to buyers in majority of the cases on the ground that prompt payment condition was not fulfilled and that the cash discount was retained by the party (ground No. 1). In regard to coin discount, the ground taken is that the coin is packed inside the container and cannot be retrieved without breaking the seal of the container and if zeal is broken, product become un -saleable/unmarketable. With regard to the earlier order dated 10.1.2003 of the CEGAT in the appellants own case on the very issues, it has been stated that this order has not been accepted by the department and appeal against the said order is in process.

(3.) WE have perused the records and have heard the submissions made on behalf of both sides. The same issues had come up for consideration earlier before this Tribunal and under our order dated 10.1.2003 we had held that both the amounts were eligible for deduction from the sale price in order to determine the correct assessable value of the goods. That order is reported in 2003 (153) ELT 621. Thus, the issue between the parties remains settled by an earlier order of this Tribunal. It has also been stated during the hearing that no appeal has been filed against the said order.