9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 490X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Union of India Vs. Pharmacia India (P) Ltd. (2010 -TMI - 77886 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ) wherein it was held that the machinery which was imported by the assessee was for installation at its factory premises to be used for purpose of manufacture as captive consumption and not for further sale of the same, in which event, there would have been no occasion to collect the duty from its custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reassessed and the goods were classified under Chapter 84. Thereby the appellant filed refund claim for Rs.1,90,585/- for excess duty paid. The lower adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim on the ground that the appellant failed to prove that they have not passed on the incidence of the duty. The appellant challenged the said order. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the lower auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., Bangalore-II Vs. Karnataka State Agro Corn Products Ltd. reported in 2006 (202) E.L.T. 47 (Kar.) and Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka decision in the case of Union of India Vs. Pharmacia India (P) Ltd. reported in 2010 (256) E.L.T. 685 (Kar.) and this Tribunal decision in the case of Golden Iron Steel Forgings Vs. Commr. of Cus. Mumbai reported in 2003 (157) E.L.T. 650 (Tri.Del.). 5. The Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Unless the Department is able to show that the government undertakings are totally different from all angles, it is not possible to accept the argument of 'unjust enrichment' on the part of the State undertakings. State and the State undertakings represent the people of the country. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pharmacia India (P) Ltd. (supra) the machinery which was impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
