9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers and qualified for cash refund of this excess duty as held by the lower appellate authority. In the circumstances, the impugned order rightly held that refund of Rs. 60,434/- did not involve unjust enrichment. In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as devoid of merit. - C/576/2005 - 1384/2008 - Dated:- 5-12-2008 - Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) Shri V.V. Hariharan, JCDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The appeal is pending since the year 2005 and stood posted from hearing from time to time on several dates. The respondents were not represented on all dates fixed for hearing. A communication dt. 12-5-08 was received by the Registry request ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discount was allowed at a uniform rate per tonne of final product sold in packages of varying capacity viz., 100 ml, 200 ml and 500 ml and 1000 ml upto 30-10-01. The impugned quantity of 329.072 tonnes was solely used to manufacture and clear refined oil sold in 1000 ml packages from 31-10-01. As enhanced discount was allowed on sale of refined oil in packages of smaller quantities also from 31-10-01, the Commissioner (A) inferred that the entire discount extended to 1000 ml packages was not on account of the reduction in the duty incidence on 329.072 MTs. He found that part of the discount @ Rs.183.65 was allowed by the respondents only to buyers of their refined oil in packages of 1000 ml manufactured from the 329.072 tonnes of crude pal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed to buyers of larger quantities. The Revenue, accordingly, prays for setting aside the impugned order. The ld JCDR reiterates the grounds taken in the appeal and submits that the impugned order proceeded as if the inputs were sold as such. 5. I have considered, the facts of the case and the submissions by the Revenue. In the instant case, it is seen from records that the respondents had canvassed their entitlement to the entire refund claimed with records showing that discount allowed was towards the excess duty claimed as refund. Therefore unjust enrichment did not entail refund of Rs. 445634/-. I find that HUL had allowed discount on sale of refined oil at a uniform rate per tonne when it was sold in packages of 1000 ml, 500 ml, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
