9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1035X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ortage and excess of payment of duty and consequence thereof. The ultimate duty liability of a relevant period is to be determined in final assessment taking into consideration entire clearance of that period in aggregate and if there arises excess payment of duty upon such finalization of making due adjustment, that shall be refundable. - all the appeals on the point of adjustability of excess payment of duty against shortage of duty paid is allowed and excess duty paid is refundable without bar of unjust enrichment applicable. Second claim of the appellant that sales return are not dutiable being goods returned back by buyers is justified. Appellant does not incur liability when cleared goods come back to his custody within the knowled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , provisional assessment is made under Rule 7 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Later all such provisional assessments are finalised and duty liability determined. Duty paid in excess of actual liability on certain clearances is adjusted against short payment of duty and upon such adjustment, excess duty paid is refundable without bar of unjust enrichment being applicable to such refund. 1.3 In finalization of assessment, an integral approach is made to determine ultimate duty liability in respect of all clearance for the relevant period. Since such situation is outcome of application of lawand excess duty paid is refundable, bar of unjust enrichment is not applicable. 3. Revenue's contention on the other hand is that the duty pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods cleared on payment of duty and not refundable. 2.5 The third issue raised by the learned counsel is that there are some mathematical errors in computation of assessable value. Such an error was created by misconception that the sale prices were cum-duty. But that it not so. Revenue says that there is finding to that effect in adjudication. Therefore, stand of Appellant should fail. 3.1 Heard both sides on the question of adjustment of excess payment of duty against short payment thereof and arise of refund if any in all the appeals. So also contentions of both sides on other three secondary issues considered. 3.2 So far as the moot question of adjustment of excess payment of duty against short payment thereof is concerned, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutory provision. If we keep in mind the principle underlying the provisions, it is only when the duty is due and it is not paid within the stipulated time and the duty is paid thereafter, in order to compensate the revenue, interest is imposed. If that is to be kept in mind, in the instant case, when the assessee has paid a sum of ₹ 1,66,56,740/- excess duty which is entitled to claim refund, he cannot be taxed with payment of excess duty in the form of interest. The entire approach of the department is unreasonable, contrary to the scheme of the Act and negatives the principle underlying these provisions. Therefore, all authorities were in error in levying and upholding the levy of interest. In view of the reasoning given by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
