9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (11) TMI 253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. The appellants herein had filed a refund claim for approximately Rs. 13.20 lakhs in respect of handloom cess paid by them during the period 1-3-1986 to 18-3-1990 under protest on the ground that unprocessed cotton cloth received by them from traders for processing had already borne the burden of handloom cess. The claim was rejected by the Assistant C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e mill. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assistant Collector holding as under : I have gone through the records of the case very carefully. I observe that unprocessed fabrics exempt from payment of Central Excise duties were also exempted from payment of cess during the period of refund claim in terms of the Khadi and Other Handloom Industries Development (Exemption from Payme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Cotton Textile (Control) Order, 1948. The appellants claim that the unprocessed fabrics received by them correspond to the description of excluded variety in the ibid Notification is also not acceptable as the exclusion is only applicable to cotton fabrics manufactured in a composite mill and the appellants have not given any evidence that they had received any of the unprocessed fabrics from a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the onus lies upon the person claiming refund to establish that there has been a double payment of cess on the same quantity of materials for which the refund is being claimed. The appellants have not been able to substantiate their case for refund, and therefore, the lower appellate authority has rightly rejected the refund claim. We are in agreement with the finding of the Commissioner (App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
