ORDER
Gowri Shankar, Member (Technical)
1. The duty of Rs. 10,11,182/- (out of which Rs. 4,35,439/- has already been paid) is demanded in the order impugned in the appeal on the ground that discount extended by the applicant to its consignment agent were not admissible. Penalty equal to duty has been imposed on the assessee, and a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on S.N. Narker, its employee.
2. While the counsel for the applicants contends that there is in reality no difference between the consignment agent and dealer, in that both carried out the same function, he is not able to explain the significant of the different terms imposed on different consignment agent and its distributor in the two agreements that we have seen. In our view, therefore, the applicability of the decisions in IDL Chemicals Ltd. v. CCE 1997 (92) ELT 289 and in CMC (India) Ltd. v. CCE 1997 (95) ELT 255 cited by the counsel require considerable examination.
3. Taking into account the amount of duty already paid and the fact that it was paid prior to issue of notice, we direct deposit by the applicant a further sum of Rs. 1 lakh towards duty upon which we waive deposit of the balance of duty and penalty and also penalty imposed on S.N. Narker, its employee and stay their recovery.
4. Compliance on 10.5.2003.