9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riate provision to determine the assessable value of yarn cleared for captive consumption by its sister unit was Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 - The lower appellate authority wrongly relied on case law which laid down that refund of duty paid by mistake of law was not governed by Section 11B of the Act and ordered refund of the impugned amount – matter remanded - E/567/2001 - 160/2009 - Dated:- 16-12-2008 - Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President and Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) Shri V.V. Hariharan, Jt. CDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)].- This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. In the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) vacated the order of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of a value it had adopted at the time of clearance. In any case the assessee's sister unit would have factored in the duty paid on the staple fibre yarn in the cost of fabrics manufactured and sold. Therefore the impugned amount of duty would have already been passed on to buyers of final products of the assessee's sister unit. The refund claim would entail unjust enrichment of the assessee. In the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the assessee had incorrectly adopted a unit price of Rs. 137/- per kg. for payment of duty on clearances during the material period till it found out the error. The assessee had adopted a price of Rs. 114/- per kg. with effect from 7-1-1997 on detecting the error. This was also the unit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enting the respondents. 4. We note that there is no dispute as to the price adopted by the assessee for the impugned clearances. As regards the sale price adopted by the assessee to work out the excess duty paid, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the same represented the sale price when such goods had been sold last before the impugned clearances were made to its sister unit. He upheld the determination of value of staple fibre yarn followed for payment of duty as appropriate. As regards unjust enrichment, the impugned order had allowed refund to the assessee relying on a judgment of the Apex Court and another judgment of the Bombay High Court. We find that the impugned clearances had been made during 14-11-1996 to 6-1-1997. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
