9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)]. - The issue relates to refund claim. 2. The Counsel submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly made observation that the customer is not entitled for refund. In this context, he drew our attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Clause (e) of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11B does provide for the purchaser of goods applying for an obtaining the refund where he can satisfy that the burden of the duty has been borne by him alone. Such a person can apply within six months of his purchase as provided in Clause (e) of Explanation-B appended to Section 11B. It is, therefore, not correct to contend that the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be remembered that such claim will be filed only by purchasers of high priced goods where the duty component is large and not by all and sundry/small purchasers. This practical inconvenience or hardship, as it is called, cannot be a ground for holding that the provisions introduced by the 1991 (Amendment) Act are a "device" or a "ruse" to retain the taxes collected illegally and to invalidate th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the matter to the lower adjudicating authority. However, it was fairly conceded that the impugned order was passed prior to the amendment of Section 35A. 3. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration of the judgment of the Supreme Court as well as the decision of the Tribunal in the aforesaid cases, we find observation made by the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
