2012 (9) TMI 887

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... their customers. While raising the supplementary invoices, the appellant only recovered duty from their customers and no interest has been recovered from the customers. Section 12(b) (sic) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides that every person, who has paid the duty of excise on the goods under this Act, shall unless the contrary is proved by him be deemed to have passed full incidence of such .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 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 receipt of price revision in January, 2008 and in march, 2008, the appellant raised the supplementary invoice with the revi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 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 upon the following decisions: (a) Dabur India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad- 2008 (228) ELT 132 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 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 the appellant by mis-calculating the interest payable by them on supplementary invoices. As the applicant had filed the refund claim and the same has been denied on the ground tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot 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 presumption of passing the incidence of interest on the buyers. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The same is set aside and the appeal is allowe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X