9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellants filed a refund claim of Rs. 51,720/- on the ground that they had cleared Pig Iron and C.I. Skull to three different buyers on payment of duty under Rule 47F(i)(ii) at the rates higher than the purchase value and thus paid excess duty. This claim is made for the excess duty paid during the period from 12-11-95 to 6-1-96. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-II, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s which clearly show that the claimant charged and recovered the duty component from their buyers as revealed from the outgoing invoices issued by the claimant at the time of clearance of their excisable goods; that the claimant fully realised the duty component which is in turn was passed on to its said buyers. He has observed that since the appellants have failed to establish that the incidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts as enumerated above that the appellants had charged and recovered the duty component from the buyers as revealed from the outgoing invoices issued by them at the time of clearance of the excisable goods and that they fully realised the duty component and it was passed on their buyers at the time of sale of their goods. It is, however, contended that they issued credit notes to their buy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
