9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant has filed this appeal against the impugned order wherein a refund claim of excess interest paid was denied on the ground of unjust enrichment. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that during the period May, 2007, the appellant cleared motor parts and subsequent to clearance, the appellant received price revision list for the said parts in the year 2008. Immediately on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sheet as receivable and the appellant has paid Income Tax also on the said excess amount of interest receivable and the onus is on the department to prove that what appellant is saying is incorrect. As the appellant has discharged their onus by proving that the burden of excess interest has not been passed on to the customers on the basis of entry shown in the Balance-sheet. The appellant relied u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Tri-Mum) (ii) System Engineers Vs. CCE, Pune - 2008 (224) ELT 463 (Tri-Mum) (iii) CCE, Pune-II Vs. Krishna SSK Ltd. - 2007 (220) ELT 192 (Tri-Mum) 4. On the other hand, learned AR reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 5. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 6. In this case, the dispute is only regarding the refund of excess interest paid by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed full incidence of such duty to the buyers of such goods. From the said provision, it is very much clear that the bar of unjust enrichment is applicable to the duty only and not for the interest. As in this case, both the lower authorities have held that bar of unjust enrichment has not been proved by the appellant, the same is not sustainable as Central Excise Act, 1944, does not provide any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
