9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Sharma, A.R. ORDER PER R.K. SINGH: Appeal is filed against order in appeal dated 22/12/2008 which upheld the order in original dated 12/03/2007 in terms of which the following order was passed: 1. An amount of Rs. 3,80,097/- only in respect of which documents to prove the payment of duty have not been submitted, is rejected. 2. An amount of Rs. 85,428/- only paid prior to lodging the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to establish that the burden of the duty paid (refund of which has been sought) was not passed on to the customers. 3. We have considered the contentions of the Ld. advocate. We find that the commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the related order-in -original observed that the burden is on the appellant to prove that the incidence of higher duty paid had not been passed on to any other person. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e even after paying duty under protest the burden can be passed on to its customers. As a matter of fact, the very fact that the invoices raised on the customers showed higher rate of duty negates the appellants contention. 4. As is evident, the primary adjudicating authority as well as the 1st appellate authority have held that the duty amounting to Rs. 66,18,046/-was not required to be paid an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
