9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 744X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The appellant cleared from its factory on 30-6-1986 a consignment of tin containers intended to store toothpowder. There was a delay in the arrival of the goods at the consignee s premises on account of breakdown in the truck carrying the goods, with the result that the consignee refused to accept the consignment. The appellant kept the goods for a few days outside the factory and was tran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons which the counsel for the appellant could not explain, the appellant filed another claim on 23-11-1992. In this claim it pointed out payment of duty twice on the same goods and sought refund of Rs. 26,600/- with specifically describing both the gate passes under which it paid the duty. Following issue of notice the Assistant Collector passed an order rejecting the claim. He said that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that duty paid on the second occasion has been recovered from the buyer. This is the reason that the departmental representative cites. 4. The incidence of duty that the appellant passed on to the buyer of the goods certainly would not be the total amount of duty that it paid on those goods. The buyer of the goods would bear the burden of duty twice over merely because the manufacturer paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sistant Commissioner s view that the incidence of duty that was transferred was the duty that was paid for the second time. On the other hand it could be argued with reasons that what was transferred is the duty that figured in the invoice which was issued to the buyer, when the goods were cleared from the appellant s factory. This is the invoice in relation to which the payment would have been ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
