9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l dismissed. - E/200/2009-EX[DB] - A/91694/2017 - Dated:- 29-12-2017 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Shri Raju, Member (Technical) Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate for the appellant Shri M.R. Melvin, Supdt. (AR) for the respondent Per: Ramesh Nair This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner whereby the Commissioner confirmed the demand of erroneous refund of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter is pending before the Hon'ble High Court, the matter maybe kept in abeyance. 3. Shri M.R. Melvin, Supdt. (AR) appearing on behalf of revenue submits that since there is no stay from the Hon'ble High Court the tribunal order will prevail, accordingly the appeal would be liable to be dismissed. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both sides, we find that the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ector which is not so in the present case. This view is duly supported by the Tribunals decision in the case of MRF Ltd. and Supreme Court decision in Metal Forgings cited supra. Therefore, the doctrine of unjust enrichment will equally apply in the present case also. So far as the passing of the incidence of duty is concerned, the respondents main plea is that the price has more of less remained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssable value indicated in the price list was much less than the invoice value after allowing the deduction of sales tax and discounts and this further establishes that the incidence of duty has been passed on. We therefore hold that the refund of the entire amount of ₹ 70,50,149.48 is liable to be rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment as this entire amount has been passed on to the cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
