2009 (2) TMI 689

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . [Order]. Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this Appeal against the impugned Order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise Service Tax, Ranchi. The Commissioner allowed the refund of Central Excise Duty on the ground that incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. 3. Learned S.D.R. has relied on the decision in the case of Commissioner v. Flock (India .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hereas the goods actually cleared under the respective invoice were valued at Rs. 5,52,950.00 only. This mistake was pointed out by the customer of the Respondents and the said customer paid the duty on the basis of value of the goods received by them as per contract. This is evident from a letter dated 29-3-06 written by the customer of the Respondents, M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, wher .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct value of goods. In the case of self-assessment, if the duty of the higher amount has been paid by mistake and the same has not been recovered, the refund is permissible under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The case of the Revenue is that the assessment was finalised. But there is nothing on record in support of this argument. In these circumstances, I find no infirmity in the impugned O .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X