9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (1) TMI 469X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed with the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), the Revenue has preferred the present appeal. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Ferro Chrome and supplied 500 M.T. of Highcarbon Ferro Chromium to M/s. SAIL against their purchase order. The said goods were originally cleared by the respondents under the cove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise had rejected the refund on the ground that the respondents have not been able to establish that the goods subsequently cleared by the respondents are the same which were returned to them. The reasons adopted by the Assistant Commissioner was that there was a shortage to the tune of 100 kg. on receipt of the goods by the respondents and subsequently, reprocessed material was different ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D-3 intimation by the respondents and verification of the same by the respondents, jurisdictional Central Excise officers. The maintenance of record by the respondents is also not being doubted by the Revenue. A doubt is being entertained by the Revenue as regards the goods returned and originally cleared based on certain inference like shortage of about 100 kg of material. The respondents have e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale was not completed. In these circumstances, the question of unjust enrichment does not arise. If that is the question, the contention raised by the respondents is acceptable. The Assistant Commissioner before granting the refund to the respondents would verify that no payment towards the consideration of the material received by M/s. SAIL including the Central Excise duty, has been made by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
