9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 981X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ward any reason as to why provision under Rule 7(6) of Central Excise Rules was invokable in spite of such clear finding by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) - in case of any change in Purchase Order no surplus amount has been paid and that any excess/short amount paid earlier had been adjusted against supplementary/further bills of ITI - refund allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ground of non-finalization of rate contract prices for supply to the Department of Telecommunication (DOT). Subsequently the assessments were finalized for the Financial Years 1996-97, 1997-98, 1999-2000 2000-01. The assessments for the Financial Years 1996-97 1997-98 were finalized through Order-in-Original dated 09/12/2010 wherein the Original Authority has held that the respondent had pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hrough impugned Order-in-Appeal No.379-381-CE/LKO/2011 dated 27/08/2012. The Original Authority had rejected the refund claim on the ground of unjust enrichment. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has observed in his impugned Order-in-Appeal that the certificate issued by the customers indicated that they have reimbursed the same amount of duty which was paid by the respondent after finalization of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. 5. Heard the ld. Counsel for M/s I.T.I. Limited, who has submitted that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has given a reasoned finding as to how the duty incidence has not been passed on to customers by way of making his observations in respect of certificate issued by the customers indicating that Customs had reimbursed amount of duty to the respondent as was paid by the respondent. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06/09/2011 issued by Pay Accounts Officer, BSNL, Raebarely who has certified that in case of any change in Purchase Order no surplus amount has been paid and that any excess/short amount paid earlier had been adjusted against supplementary/further bills of ITI. Therefore, we find that the ground raised by Revenue is not sustainable. We, therefore, reject the appeal filed by Revenue. Cross Objec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
