9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... greement the appellant has correctly discharged the Central Excise duty; I find that the reasoning adopted by the both the lower authorities is incorrect as clause no. 4.3 requires the appellant herein to discharge the Central Excise duty correctly and clear the goods after payment of duty while clause no. 3.17 is very particular as to the rates which are to be considered for discharge of duty liability by the appellant. - appellant has been showing the amount for which refund is claimed, in the balance sheet under head loan and in advances. This also indicates that appellant has not expensed out the amounts which have been paid by them as excess Central Excise duty in this appeal. - impugned order are held as unsustainable and liable to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eement copy, the agreement, Chartered Accountant s certificate and letter from Karnataka Antibiotics Pharmaceuticals Ltd. indicating that they are eligible for the refund of amount paid excess by them; the adjudicating authority has gone beyond the show cause notice and rejected the refund claim on a different ground i.e. inter pretating the provisions of agreement, entered by appellant with Karnataka Antibiotics Pharmaceuticals Ltd.; he would then draw my attention to the order passed by the first appellate authority and submit that the same findings are recorded by the first appellate authority. He would draw my attention to the Chartered Accountant s certificate dated 25-06-2008, before the adjudication and letter dated 28-03-2008, r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. Considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. 6. On perusal of records, I find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the amount excise duty paid by the appellant in the excess, not payable as per the agreement whether refund arises or otherwise. 7. Undisputed facts are that the appellant entered in to an agreement with Karnataka Antibiotics Pharmaceuticals Ltd. for manufacturing Pharmaceutical goods under job work/loan license basis. It is also undisputed that clause no. 3.17 of the agreement discuses about the amounts they are supposed to get and also discharge of Central Excised duty on the amount of consideration received, working backwards. It is seen form the records that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt from Karnataka Antibiotics Pharmaceuticals Ltd. I also find that on 28.03.2008, Karnataka Antibiotics Pharmaceuticals Ltd. has categorly informed the appellant that they will not be making any payment separately on account of Central Excise duty for the excess duty, if any, paid by appellant in various invoices and they also suggested that suitable refund claim be filed before the jurisdictional authorities and they would be discharging their obligation of making payment to the appellant in accordance with para no. 3.17 of the agreement. The said letter is there indicator that the appellant was not paid excess Excise duty, by Karnataka Antibiotics Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 8.3. Thirdly, I do find from the balance sheets produced be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
