9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER Per Bench The appellants who are a 100% EOU of M/s. Brakes India Ltd., Chennai are engaged in the manufacture of pad assembly falling under CETH 87083900 of CETA, 1985. The brief facts are that as per sub-section (5) of Section 3 of Customs Act, 1962, clearances to DTA are subject to additional duty of customs. In terms of Notification No.23/2003-CE dated 31.3.2003, for calculating the aggreg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al customs duty has been rightly paid by them. The refund also was rejected on the ground that the appellants have not produced any document to establish the ground of unjust enrichment. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri M. Kannan made the following submissions whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record that the refund arose only because inadvertently SAD was paid for the clearance between June 2007 and August 2007 whereas for subsequent clearance no SAD was paid and was not subjected to by the Central Excise authorities. (g) It may be caused to be verified whether or not the sale price for PAD assembly remained the same (during the period in question), whether SAD was paid or not for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No.23/2003 (Sl. No. 2) and also on the ground of unjust enrichment. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that if the goods are exempt from payment of sales tax / VAT, then the additional customs duty is to be included. The subject goods were leviable to Sales Tax / VAT and the payment of Sales Tax / VAT was deferred to the point of sale. As there is no exemption from VAT / Sales Tax, per s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
