9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t covered under Section 61 (3) of the Customs Act relying on Ashok Leyland Ltd. Vs CC Chennai [2001 (3) TMI 786 - CEGAT, CHENNAI] case which has been upheld by Supreme Court in 2001 (11) TMI 974 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. As the appellant did not place decisions of the Tribunal which was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue before the lower authority and the Commissioner (Appeals), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... By Order No.507/2004 dt. 1.3.2004, the Tribunal remanded back the matter to the original authority to re-adjudicate as under :- We have considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that the Circulars issued by the Board are binding on the Departmental authorities. In this case, the circular No.62/99-cus dt. 17.9.99 was issued by the Board clarifying the issue involved in the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground of non-submission of documents relating to the principles of unjust enrichment viz. audited balance sheet for the relevant period so as to verify whether the claimant had not passed on the incidence of interest thereon, if any, to any other person. By the impugned order, Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the lower authority s order with the direction to the appellant to produce all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The learned Joint Commissioner (AR) submits that the Commissioner has rightly remanded the matter to the adjudicating lower authority in respect of supplying documents for the unjust enrichment. 5. After hearing both sides, I find that the appellant did not place decisions of the Tribunal which was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue before the lower authority and the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
