9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot is treated as place of removal, and the department, in fact, is demanding duty in the case of increase in MRP and consequent duty increase, there is no justification to deny the refund of excess duty paid once the person seeking refund fulfills all the conditions. When the department extends its arms up to the depot price, the same facility is available to the appellant also as the principle of equity demands. The Central Excise laws work on the principle that what is due to the Govt. only to be demanded and what is not due is to be refunded once the test of unjust enrichment is passed. In view of the above legal position, the appellant is entitled to get refund subject to the provisions of Sec. 11B - Decided in favor of assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he above order, the appellant has filed this appeal mainly on the following grounds :- (a) that rejection of their refund claim on the ground that there is no provision to grant refund in the case of downward revision of price; (b) that duty is payable only on the rate chargeable to the ultimate consumer; (c) that in the instant case, the duty paid at the factory was over and above the MRP for which the goods were sold to the ultimate consumer; (d) there are documentary evidences for their claim; 4. A personal hearing was held on 22-11-2011. Shri T.S. Balasubramanian, Advocate authorized by the appellant appeared on behalf of the appellant and Shri S. Amaline John, Superintendent appeared from the departmental side. Dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old at reduced MRP rates from the depots. The LAA has rejected the refund claim holding that there is no provision under Sec. 4A to reduce the declared MRP at the depots point. The filing of refund claim necessitated on account of higher duty paid at the factory on the removal of goods to the depots. The claiming of refund is covered under Sec. 11B. Therefore it is to be seen that what Sec.11B speaks of. The section reads that (1) any person claiming refund of any duty of excise and interest, if any, paid on such duty may make an application to AC or DC before the expiry of one year .. . From the above reading any person can claim refund of duty and interest paid on the duty. In other words, refund is claimed when the duty and interest alr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of increase in MRP. In fact, in the instant case, there were such payments. In the same analogy, the appellant is seeking refund under Sec. 11B. Therefore, once the depot is treated as place of removal, and the department, in fact, is demanding duty in the case of increase in MRP and consequent duty increase, there is no justification to deny the refund of excess duty paid once the person seeking refund fulfills all the conditions. When the department extends its arms up to the depot price, the same facility is available to the appellant also as the principle of equity demands. The Central Excise laws work on the principle that what is due to the Govt. only to be demanded and what is not due is to be refunded once the test of unjust enrich ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
