2009 (10) TMI 754 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Admissibility of refund amount due to limitation.
2. Evidence presented by the Appellant to support refund claim.
3. Revenue's objection regarding lack of evidence by the Appellant.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Admissibility of refund amount due to limitation
The Appellant's counsel conceded that a part of the refund amount, Rs. 53,955, was not admissible due to being time-barred. However, the remaining balance of Rs. 60,338 was deemed admissible as it stemmed from a price variation clause, indicating that the duty burden was not passed on to the buyers. The certificates provided by a Chartered Accountant confirmed that the buyers had deducted the excise duty element while making payments to the Appellant, demonstrating non-transfer of duty burden. Thus, the Tribunal ruled that the Appellant was entitled to the refund of the balance amount.

Issue 2: Evidence presented by the Appellant to support refund claim
The Appellant contended that evidence, in the form of certificates from a Chartered Accountant, showed that the duty burden was not passed on to the buyers, supporting the refund claim. The Tribunal noted that the evidence presented by the Appellant was sufficient to establish that no unjust enrichment had occurred. The Revenue failed to counter this evidence, and the Tribunal found no contradiction to the Appellant's claims. Consequently, based on the evidence provided, the Tribunal concluded that the Appellant was eligible for the refund of Rs. 60,338 as there was no unjust enrichment on their part.

Issue 3: Revenue's objection regarding lack of evidence by the Appellant
The Revenue objected to the refund claim, citing the Appellant's failure to produce evidence as per the Adjudication findings. However, the Tribunal observed that the Appellant had indeed provided evidence, which remained unchallenged by the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized that once the Assessee presents evidence that goes uncontested, it supports the Appellant's claim. Therefore, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, granting the refund of Rs. 60,338 to the Appellant based on the evidence presented and the lack of rebuttal from the Revenue.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the admissibility of the refund amount of Rs. 60,338 to the Appellant, considering the evidence provided and the absence of any unjust enrichment, while acknowledging the limitation on a portion of the refund amount.