9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bound to refund to the assessee the excess duty calculated which is not in dispute, finding of the Tribunal is sound and just and does not call for interference, substantial question of law raised is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue, appeal dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, it set aside the orders passed by the adjudicating authority as well as the first appellate authority and upheld the claim and granted relief sought for with consequential relief. Aggrieved by the same, revenue is before this Court. 3. The appeal was admitted to consider the following substantial question of law : "Whether the finding of the Tribunal in setting aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner in rejecting their claim on the basis that, the duty goods were removed from the factory during the month of March, 2003 on payment of duty and the customer has raised the debit note only in the month of June, 2003 which amounts to instance of the duty has been passed by him to the customer?" 4. Learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he adjudicating authority rejected the said piece of evidence holding that debit note if it had been raised in the month of March, 2003, it could have been looked into, but when a debit note is raised for a different month, it cannot be the basis for such refund. But the documents produced in the case such as, accounts books, as pointed out by the Tribunal, clearly discloses that customer has not paid this excess duty. When once it is admitted that the department has received excess duty, they are bound to refund it to the person who has paid the excess duty. If the customer of the assessee has paid that excess duty, customer would have been entitled to the said refund. When the customer is not claiming refund, when he has raised a debit no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
