Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S Wockhardt Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S Wockhardt Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 09, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/24924

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/24924
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Aug 09, 2001
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

M/S Wockhardt Ltd.

Excerpt

1. the respondents granted different discounts to their dealers placed in different regions. the asstt. commissioner denied such grant placing reliance on order no. 24/14/93 dt 31.12.93 issued by the central board of excise & customs. the commissioner (appeals) reversed this order placing reliance on certain judgments of the tribunal holding that the concerned provisions did not require uniformity in traders discount.this order is agitated in this appeal from the revenue placing reliance once again upon the circular of the board. other circulars are also cited holding that wholesale dealers could not be considered as buyers in different classes merely because they are located in different regions.2. this issue has been settled long back. the circular on which the asstt. commissioner had placed reliance was quashed by the delhi high court in their judgment in the case of indian rayon & industries ltd. [1994 (73) elt 25.] the practice of granting different discount to buyers situated in different regions had been dealt with by the supreme court in their judgment in the case of cce, mumbai vs amar dye & chemical ltd. [2000 (36) rlt 362.] in view of this, the appeal does not survive and is dismissed. (dictated in court)

Full Judgment

1. The respondents granted different discounts to their dealers placed in different regions. The Asstt. Commissioner denied such grant placing reliance on order No. 24/14/93 dt 31.12.93 issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs. The Commissioner (Appeals) reversed this order placing reliance on certain judgments of the Tribunal holding that the concerned provisions did not require uniformity in traders discount.

This order is agitated in this appeal from the Revenue placing reliance once again upon the circular of the Board. Other circulars are also cited holding that wholesale dealers could not be considered as buyers in different classes merely because they are located in different regions.

2. This issue has been settled long back. The circular on which the Asstt. Commissioner had placed reliance was quashed by the Delhi High Court in their judgment in the case of Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd. [1994 (73) ELT 25.] The practice of granting different discount to buyers situated in different regions had been dealt with by the Supreme Court in their judgment in the case of CCE, Mumbai vs Amar Dye & Chemical Ltd. [2000 (36) RLT 362.] In view of this, the appeal does not survive and is dismissed. (Dictated in Court)

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S Wockhardt Ltd. Same Subject MRTP