2006 (2) TMI 397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order]. I heard both sides and perused the record. The dispute is about refund of Central Excise duty. 2. The facts leading to filing of the refund application are that the appellant is a manufacturer of bicycles and parts and had been selling those parts, inter alia, for use as original equipment. It filed refund application in respect of sales made to M/s. Rockman Cycle Industries Lim .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . decision has no application in the facts of the present case. It is being pointed out that in the present case, the invoice prices were not accepted by the buyers. No payment was made at those rates. The payment for the goods as well as excise duty were made in terms of revised price. The learned Counsel for the appellant has emphasized that in such a factual situation, refund is permissible as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... smissed. 4. It is clear from para 9 above of the Larger bench judgment in the case of M/s. S. Kumar Limited that a refund claim on the ground of non acceptance of higher invoiced prices by the buyer and it is established that payment of price and duty were in terms of an agreed lower price, satisfies the requirement of unjust enrichment. In the present case, there is no finding by the lower aut .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X