KADAK INDIA LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the OIA No. 55/02 -CE dated 4.4.2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Bangalroe.

(2.) The issue involved is the admissibility of cash discount to the appellants. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(3.) The appellants are the manufacturers of photography cameras. They submitted price lists and price declaration to the department claiming deduction of Rs. 30/ - per camera on account of cash discount. The appellants availed the cash discount at the time of stock transfer of the cameras to their various depots. The Revenue issued show cause notices to the appellants in the year 1994 on the ground that the cameras are sold to the customers without allowing cash discount. Initially there was a demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 2,26,368/ -. Subsequently, show cause notices were issued on the same issue. The Assistant Collector in her order dated 26.10.1995, confirmed the demand on the ground that in the invoices the particulars of the decisions have not been indicated. In all, the total demand amounted to Rs. 5,70,582/ - and the same has been paid. The appellants challenged the AC's Orders in appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dated 1.9.19969 remanded the matter to the Original Authority. In the remand order, dated 26.2.1999. The Assistant Collector allowed the appellants claim towards cash discount and dropped further proceedings against the appellant initiated earlier. The Assistant Collector while dropping proceedings has given the following findings: I have gone through the records of the case and submissions made during the personal hearing. The Order -in -Original No. 104/95 confirming the duty demanded in four Show Cause Notices by not allowing the cash discount was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the case was remanded for de novo consideration. On the very same issue the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore vide his order No. 40/97 dated 12.8.1997 has confirmed the demand for the earlier period i.e. from August 1990 to April 1994 on the very same assessee. The assessee went in appeal against the Commissioner's order and the CEGAT vide its Order No. 67/98 dated 13.1.1998 has allowed the appeal of the assessee with consequential relief. While deciding the case the CEGAT has observed "...we observe from a reading of the impugned order that no findings have been given by the adjudicating authority to the effect that cash discount has been disallowed to a person who has made prompt payment. In the absence of any such findings, we do not see anything wrong in the appellant's practice to allow cash discount to persons who made prompt payment. There are clearly two classes of buyers, one who makes prompt payment and the one who does not make prompt payments and, therefore there can be two prices." In the instant case, also there are two class of buyers. The assessee has established this by producing the copies of their invoices. On perusal of copies of invoices it is clear that the assessee is allowing the cash discount. In view of the above I find that the cash discount as claimed by the assessee is an allowable discount and hence I pass the order as follows: