From the Judgment and Order dated 30.5.88 of the Cus toms Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in E Misc 194/87 A E A No.
32 17 of 1988.
The appellant had engaged several dealers with a view to promote its sales.
308/88 A. Gauri Shankar, Mrs. H. Wahi, Manoj Arora and S. Rajjappa for the Appellant.
One of these deductions was described as trade discount and another as service charge discount.
The period with which we are companycerned in this appeal is the period September 9, 1979 to July 26, 1983.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1365/85 A Order No.
The appellant filed several price lists in Part I and Part II in respect of the clearances of paper and paper boards made by the appellant.
Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General, V.C. Mahajan, R.P. Srivastava and P. Parmeshwaran for the Respondent.
The appellant is a public limited companypany engaged inter alia in the manufacture of paper and paper boards which were assessable under Tariff Item No.
Under clause a of subsection 1 of section 4, it is provided, in brief, that the duty of excise is chargeable on any excisable goods with reference to value which shall, subject to the other provisions of the Act, be deemed to be the numbermal price thereof and the numbermal price, generally speaking, is the price at which such goods are ordinarily sold by the assessee to a buyer in the companyrse of wholesale trade for delivery at the time and place or removal, where the buyer is number a related person and the price is the sole companysideration for the sale.
Section 4 of the Central Excises Act prescribes the mode of valuation of excisable goods for the purposes of charging of the duty of excise.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant assessee from a judgment of the Central Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi hereinafter re ferred to as the said Tribunal.
17 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 hereinafter referred to as the Central Excises Act .
In the fixation of the numbermal price of paper and paper boards manufactured by the appel lant for the purposes of levy of excise duty, the appellant claimed several deductions.
