9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER [Order per: M.V. Ravindran] All these three appeals are filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No.HYD-CEX-001-APP-58-59-16-17 dated 29/07/2016 and Order in-Appeal No.HYD-EXCUS-001-APP-065-16-17-CE dated 28/10/2016. 2. None appeared on behalf of the Respondent nor there is any request for adjournment. It is seen from the records that this matter is coming up for disposal from May 2017 and there has been request for adjournment from the respondent on some pretext or the other. 3. It seems that the respondent is not keen to defend the matter before the Tribunal. Heard learned A.R. 4. It is his submission that the issue is regarding the grant of refund to the appellant in respect of quantitative discount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudged in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills in Final Order No.A/31518-31527/2017 dated 15.09.2017. I gainfully reproduce the ratio which is in paragraphs 6.5, 6.6 7. 6.5 Coming to the issue of unjust enrichment, both the lower authorities have relied upon the ratio of Tribunal decision in Dharmsai Morarji Chemicals Limited Vs. CCE, Mumbai-VII reported in [2002 (150) ELT 659 (Tri.-Mumbai) while holding that unjust enrichment is not applicable in this case. The Tribunal in Dharmsai Morarji Chemicals Limited cases involving similar situation where credit notes had been issued to the buyers, had relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Addison Co. Ltd. [2001 (120) E.L.T. 44 (Mad.) = 2003-TIOL-3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Welfare Fund under section 11-B of Central Excise Act 1944, has merit, and is allowed. 7. To sum up, that part of the impugned orders upholding the claim for refund of quantity discount. on merits- is sustained. Revenue appeal on that score does not succeed. However, that part of the impugned orders holding that payment of refund to the appellants would not amount to unjust enrichment, is set aside. The prayer of Revenue that refund amounts should be credited into Consumer Welfare Fund. is allowed. Ordered accordingly. 7. In view of the foregoing, the issue having been decided by this Bench, I hold that the impugned order is liable to be set aside. I set aside the impugned order and that part of the order of refund to the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
