2017 (12) TMI 758

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... excise duty payable had there been no error in computation - the presumption of unjust enrichment stands rebutted by the appellant - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Shri S.S. Garg, Judicial Member Mr. Syed Peeran, Advocate - For the Appellant Mrs. Kavitha Podwal, AR - For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S. GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 25.4.2017 passed by the Commissioner (A), whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods such as synthetic organic dye and tanning stuff and filed a refund claim for ₹ 8,93,569/- on 24.4.2015 for the duty pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en passed without considering the submissions of the appellant and without considering all the documents produced on record. He further submitted that the credit note issued was only to the extent of difference in material value and the CST component. He also submitted that the appellant had collected the exact amount that they were required to collect from the buyer and therefore, the excess duty paid was not passed on to the buyer and this aspect is proved by the certificate issued by the customer stating that the amount paid by them to the appellant was only ₹ 2,51,448.64. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decision rendered in the case of Punjab Communication Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh: 2006 (199) ELT 161 (Tri.-Del.) w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appellant. He further submitted that the appellant has raised credit note to the customer without reflecting the excise duty on those credit notes and thereby the appellant has benefited of the difference in amount on invoices and the amount in credit notes. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record and the various judgments relied upon by the appellant, I find that there was computational error while issuing the invoices and higher duty was paid than the actual duty required to be paid. The refund was rejected mainly on the ground that the appellant has failed to prove that incidence of duty has not been passed on to the buyer whereas the appellant by way of documentary evidence on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X