2018 (3) TMI 408 - AT - Central Excise

Refund claim - unjust enrichment - Held that - since the documents were not before the Commissioner (Appeals) and, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) has not examined these documents. Further, the appellant has produced these documents before me, but the same has not been examined by the original authority - this case needs to be remanded back to the original authority to examine afresh various documents viz. balance sheet and the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant and then decide the refund claim of the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Admissibility of refund claim - Consideration of evidence and law in passing the order - Requirement of certificate of Chartered Accountant to prove non-passing of duty incidence to buyer - Examination of balance sheet and certificate by appellate authority - Necessity of remand to original authority for fresh examination and decision.

Analysis:
The appellant filed a refund claim of ?1,63,150 under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, related to supplies made to a buyer. The buyer retrospectively reduced rates, leading to the refund claim. The respondent questioned the admissibility of the claim due to lack of evidence showing non-passing of duty incidence. Despite the original authority sanctioning the refund, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order citing absence of a Chartered Accountant certificate and balance sheet indicating the duty amount as receivables. The appellant argued that they had provided these documents, which were not considered by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Upon review, the appellate authority found that the documents were indeed crucial for a proper decision but were not examined by the Commissioner (Appeals). Consequently, the case was remanded to the original authority for a fresh examination of the balance sheet and the Chartered Accountant certificate. The appellate authority emphasized the importance of complying with the principles of natural justice in deciding the refund claim. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand for a fresh decision based on the newly submitted evidence.

In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of by way of remand, highlighting the significance of considering all relevant documents and ensuring a fair examination before reaching a decision on the admissibility of a refund claim under the Central Excise Act, 1944.