9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/683, 1612 & 1614/2009-EX[SM] WITH CROSS E/CROSS/ 129, 142 & 144/2009 - A/70091-70093/2017-SM[BR] - Dated:- 16-12-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Supdt. for the Department (s) Shri T. K. Srivastava, Advocate for the Respondent (s) Per Mr. Anil Choudhary : The issue in these appeals by Revenue is, whether the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the common impugned order have rightly allowed the refund to the respondent and remanded the matter in respect of OIO No.81/Refund/RBL/2008 dated 09.04.2008 with direction to decide the refund claim afresh. In view of the observations, as contained in para-4 of the impugned order. 2. The brief f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he price variation on account of discount has been adjusted in customer Ledger account by way of credit notes and payment realised by the customer is always as per the adjustment of credit notes. 3. The Cd. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order have been pleased to hold that vide earlier Order-in-Appeal dated 25.01.2007; it was directed to the Deputy Commissioner to extend the facility of provisional assessment to the appellant-assessee. Further observing that the appellant had vide their letter dated 07.03.2006 requested to allow provisional assessment, which was finally rejected by Revenue on 11.10.2006. Subsequently, provisional assessment is allowed with effect from 01.04.2007, after furnishing bond and bank guarantee, conse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the buyers, who in most cases will be a dealer and not on the prices at which that buyer, in turn, sells to his sub- dealers or to the retailers or to the ultimate consumer. The dealer, who received the goods from the manufacturer, may charge to his buyer the full amount of duty ignoring the duty reduced by manufacturer and the said fact cannot be a ground for denying the refund to the manufacturer. Further, in the said order relating to the prior period, this Tribunal held that it is not disputed that the respondent assessee has given quantitative discounts to the distributors and issue credit notes to them. The distributors are the buyers and for the purpose of unjust enrichment, they have to be considered so. There is no concept of n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
