2007 (9) TMI 1 - AT - Central Excise

Refund(Central Excise) Appellant demand for refund claim on the basis that assessable value on which duty paid is not correct Authority looking over the prior decision and accordingly set off the decision

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim rejection based on incorrect assessable value calculation.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the order setting aside the rejection of a refund claim by the respondent. The appellants had to clear final products to purchasers at a fixed price inclusive of duties. An error in charging excise duty led to a refund claim. The adjudicating authority rejected the claim, stating that any change in duty structure should have been anticipated by the appellants. The Commissioner (Appeal) upheld the rejection, noting the discrepancy in excise duty rates and assessable value calculation.

The Commissioner (Appeal) correctly concluded that the assessable value was wrongly adopted due to the lower excise duty rate applied by the respondent. The buyers did not pay the excess excise duty charged. The issue mirrored a previous Division Bench decision in GAIL v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Gwalior, where it was established that passing on duty liability only occurs upon payment by the buyer. The appellant's case was found not to fall under unjust enrichment provisions.

Respecting the precedent set by the Division Bench in GAIL, the tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. The judgment highlighted that the duty amount was not passed on to the buyers, as evidenced by payment certificates showing payments made at lower prices. The appeal outcome aligned with the principles established in the GAIL case, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal.