9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal) had relied upon the letter dated 11/10/2011 of M/s. VFJ alone and allowed the appeal without discussing whether the documents called for from the appellants by the adjudicating authority were necessary to process their refund claims under the provisions of Section 11B of the Act - the applicant did not produce the documents called for from them to process their refund claims – order of the Commissioner (Appeal) set aside and the matter remitted back to the adjudicatory authority to decide the issue afresh. He should provide a list of those documents necessary to verify the contention of the applicant/appellant that refund was due as according to variation clause in the contract/supply order, price was reduced and consequently the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee cannot claim the refund merely as they had issued credit notes of the differential amount and the duty subsequent to clearance of the goods from the factory. He relied upon various case laws. He further observed that the applicant had not submitted the required documents to co-relate the goods supplied to M/s. VFJ through Excise invoices issued by the assessee. He further observed that from the copy of the supply order submitted by the party it was noticed that it's terms and conditions and certain annexures were not enclosed and nomenclature used in supply order with reference to part No./Drawing No. does not correspond. Accordingly, the Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim. The Respondent filed appeal before Commissioner (Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on to the customers at the time of clearance, the assessee can still claim refund under Section 11C(2) of Central Excises and Salt Act by issuing Credit Notes". The Ld. A.R. submits that appeal against the aforesaid Tribunal's order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sangam Processors, Bhilwara. Apex Court judgement in case of Sangam Processors was considered as a precedent by the Larger Bench in case of S. Kumars Ltd. Vs. CCE, Indore reported in 2003 (153) ELT 217 (Tri.). The Ld. A.R. has further submitted that in this case the Respondent was requested to submit certain documents by the adjudicating authority but the same were not submitted to him for the purpose of verification. He submitted that in view of these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of credit note/debit note that incidents of duty was passed on is debarred". As regards non-production of documents, it is the contention that the applicant had produced all the documents before the adjudicating authority and they can still produce the same. The Ld. Advocate agreed to produce before the adjudicating authority, the documents necessary to process their claims under the provisions of Section 11B of the Act. He, however, requested for the directions to the Lower Authorities that they should be asked to produce only the documents relevant to the present proceedings. 6. Heard both sides and perused the records. After hearing for sometimes, I find that the appeal itself can be disposed off at this stage. Consequently, wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia for supply of explosives for the period 1/4/2000 to 31/3/2001, fixed by an agreement between two parties. Initially, price of excisable goods beginning from 1/4/2001 onwards was not fixed, so goods cleared at higher rate. Thereafter, the assessee entered into agreement with Coal India and rates were reduced therefore the assessee issued credit notes to M/s. Coal India towards excess amount for the period of supply beginning from 1/4/2001. The Hon'ble Court in this case observed as under: "it is not disputed by the Revenue that at the time of payment of excise duty the assessees had made it clear to the Department that they were paying the excise duty on the basis of the provisional price applicable for the period 1-4-2000 to 31-3-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority were necessary to process their refund claims under the provisions of Section 11B of the Act. At the same time, I observe that adjudicating authority under para 5.3 and 5.4 of his order had categorically observed that the applicant did not produce the documents called for from them to process their refund claims. 7. In view of these facts, I set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeal) and remit the case back to the adjudicating authority with the directions to decide the case afresh. He should provide a list of those documents necessary to verify the contention of the applicant/appellant that refund was due as according to variation clause in the contract/supply order, price was reduced and consequently the differential amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
