9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. Mahanagar Gas Ltd., against denial of refund of Central Excise duty paid by them. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant argued that they are engaged in supplying gas to various oil marketing companies. In the process of supply they gives certain trade discounts to the said companies. The trade discount was revised with retrospective effect and as a result the appellants are seeking re-valuation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted out that the appellants had admitted the following: i) OMCs have adjusted credit note amount in their subsequent invoices and paid balance (net of credit note value) ii) Credit note is not co-relatable because it's pertains to both zones. 3.1 He argued that in these circumstances, it is not possible to co-relate the credit notes with these consignments. He further pointed out that the credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant had supplied goods to BEST which is a consumer of gas and could not have passed the burden of excise duty to anybody else directly. In the instant case the buyers are oil marketing companies who directly transferred the burden of excise to their consumers. Thus, the fact in the two cases are considerably different. In the first case the issue of credit notes could be of some value to dischar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nation of assessable value. If the appellant had any doubt regarding the finality of the transaction value at the time of clearance they should have adopted the method of provisional assessment.
6. In these circumstances, I find that refund itself is not admissible to the appellant, the appeal is consequently dismissed.
(Pronounced in Court on 28/12/17) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
