9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for change of the appellants' name to "M/s. Saralee Household & Bodycare Pvt. Ltd.". This application is accompanied by a Certificate of Incorporation dated 18-10-2002 of the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu, Chennai evidencing amendment of the name of the company in the Certificate of Registration. After hearing both sides, we allow this application. Accordingly, the appellants' name wherever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee. Subsequently, a refund claim was filed for the excess duty paid for the above period. This claim was rejected by the original authority on the ground of unjust enrichment and the decision of that authority was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) as per Order-in-Appeal No. 190/99, dated 31-8-99. This order of the Appellate Commissioner is under challenge in the present appeal. 3.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearance of the goods. 2.Learned Counsel submits that what was collected by the appellants from their buyers was only the price of the goods plus duty @ 20%, though duty at higher rate was indicated in the statutory invoices. The extra duty (10%) was retained as "receivable from Govt.", pending settlement of the classification dispute. It is submitted that this factual situation was clear from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of dispute, there was variation of the price of the goods as evidenced by the commercial invoices raised by the assessee on their buyers. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Commissioner v. Allied Photographics India Ltd., 2004 (166) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), learned SDR submits that uniformity in price before and after the assessment does not lead to the inevitable conclusion that incidence of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... countant's certificates and books of account for the period of dispute were produced by the assessee to show that the Excise Duty paid in excess was retained as "receivables from Govt.". The lower authorities have not rebutted the authenticity of the documentary evidence adduced by the assessee. In the circumstances, as in the case of Pride Foramer (supra), we must hold that presumption of unjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
