9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the cement was dispatched to depots and not to end customer and that the depots are neither registered under Central Excise Act nor have issued any Central Excise invoices, unless the department has evidence or proof to the contrary, it cannot be concluded without basis that incidence of duty has been passed on to the customers requiring the claimed amounts to be credited to CWF. This being so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SP w.e.f 07-12-2008. However, due to delay in updation of rate changes in the software of the appellant company, cement was cleared at 12% instead of 8% on 7th and 8th December, 2008, resulting in excess payment of duty. The said fact was intimated to the department vide letter dated 08-12-2008. The appellant preferred refund claim of ₹ 10,93,618/- of the excess duty paid on clearances to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not arise. 2.2 Principles of unjust enrichment does not apply where the goods are sold under MRP. 2.3 Where goods are sold at a composite rate to customer, principles of unjust enrichment would not apply where higher rate of duty was paid. 2.4 Where the excess duty has been paid on account of mistake in adoption of rate of duty or value, unjust enrichment would not apply. 2.5 Where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave gone through the facts of the case. 5. Original authority has taken note of the Chartered Accountants averment that verified the invoices raised by the branches and confirmed that branches have not issued any Central Excise invoices passing on duty as they are not registered, under Central Excise Act. However, the Chartered Accountants certificate has not been accepted on the ground that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
