2006 (1) TMI 386 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellants are eligible for refund of duty paid by the manufacturer through Modvat.

Analysis:
The appeal involved M/s. ARR Sales Agency challenging the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding the eligibility for refund of duty paid through Modvat. The Commissioner held that since the final products were not dutiable, the Modvat credit for inputs would not be available. He noted that the manufacturer had used the input duty credit for duty payment, stating that refund of duty paid through Modvat would essentially be a refund of duty paid on inputs, which were dutiable. The appellants argued citing a ruling by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras that 'Scented Supari' was not excisable during the material period, making them eligible for refund, subject to unjust enrichment rules.

The appellants did not appear for the hearing, and no adjournment request was made. The learned SDR reiterated the Commissioner (Appeals) contentions, rejecting the refund claim. After examining the case records, the judge found no reason to interfere with the Commissioner's order, ultimately rejecting the appeal. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court by Dr. T.V. Sairam, J.