9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of goods, the respondent herein had charged the Central Excise Duty in the invoices which were paid by the buyer. This fact is evident from the refund claim filed by the buyer. Since the buyer has withdrawn the refund application and on 10.07.2007 the respondent had filed the refund application, it is evident that the Central Excise Duty amount was not returned by the respondent to the buyer till ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do not find any merits in the impugned order. - Decided in favour of Revenue - E/959/2008-EX [DB] - Final ORDER NO. 52906/2016 - Dated:- 11-4-2016 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) and Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical) Present for the Appellant : Shri. S. Nanthuk,JCDR Present for the Respondent : Shri.P.D. Vasu (Rep.) ORDER This appeal is directed against the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... horities. The refund application field by the respondent was adjudicated and vide order dated 07.09.2007 refund of ₹ 1,79,615/- was allowed in favour of the respondent. 3. Feeling aggrieved with the adjudication order dated 07.09.2007, the Department had preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). In appeal against the adjudication order, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has disa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me of supply of goods, subsequent issuance of Cheque which is in the form of a credit note cannot be considered as a document to prove the fact that the incidence of duty has not been passed on. 6. We find support from the judgment cited by the ld. D.R. in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs vs Dutron Plastics reported in 2015 (322) ELT 267 (Guj.), wherein the Hon ble Gujara ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
