9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PREME COURT], where it was held that the Assessee is entitled for filing a claim for refund on the basis of credit notes raised by him towards turnover discount. The case needs to be remanded back to the original authority to determine whether the principle of unjust enrichment is applicable or not - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/124/2004-DB - 20025/2016 - Dated:- 6-1-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Mr. N. Anand, Advocate For the Appellant Shri N. Jagadish, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 23.12.2003 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby he rejected the appeal of the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without appreciating the legal provisions as well as the judgments rendered by the higher judicial fora. He further submitted that both the authorities erred in law on facts in holding that charging of duty in the invoice amounts to passing on the burden of duty to customer even though credit notes were issued subsequently including the duty amount. He further submitted that the allowability of cash discount is contingent on future action of the buyer and cannot be considered at the time of raising the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es 2003 (153) ELT 694 (Tri.-LB) In view of the above latest decisions, covering the same issue that is whether refund of duty is admissible where adjustments are made subsequent to clearance of goods, the order of the lower authority is sustainable. 6.1 Further, the learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that this issue is no more res integra in view of the recent decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Addison and Company Ltd.: 2016-TIOL-146-SC-LB. Here it is important to refer few relevant paragraphs from the recent judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court. Paragraphs 14, 21, 22, 23 are reproduced herein for ready reference. 14. We have considered the submissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pheld by this Court. It is clear from the above that the Assessee is entitled for filing a claim for refund on the basis of credit notes raised by him towards turnover discount. 15 - 20 .. ... 21. That a consumer can make an application for refund is clear from paras 98 and 99 of the judgment of this Court in Mafatlal Industries (supra). We are bound by the said findings of a Larger Bench of this Court. The word 'buyer in Clause (e) to proviso to Section 11-B (2) of the Act cannot be restricted to the first buyer from the manufacturer. Another submission which remains to be considered is the requirement of verification to be done for the purpose of finding out who ultimately bore the burden of excise duty. It might be difficult ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
