9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty under protest and were issuing the Central Excise invoice as per the law i.e. showing the duty element separately. However, the commercial invoice issued did not show the duty element separately. The CCE (Appeals) after recording a finding to the effect - "..... The appellants had started paying the duly effective from 25-3-1999. Prior to the said dated when they started paying duty in their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he sale price of the goods on account of increase in the cost of raw materials, in support of which they have produced a Chartered Accountant's certificate. This is evidence enough that the incidence of the duty paid under protest was borne by them and was not passed on to their customers." and thereafter relying upon the catena of decision beginning with Metro Tyres Ltd. [1995 (80) E.L.T. 410] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in price was not due to raw material cost increase and was much more than incidence of duty. (b) The CA certificate does not bring out the correct picture since the amounts shown are under the Head 'Deposits and Investments' and would have no bearing on Profit and Loss. (c) From Ledger Accounts it can be seen that total amounts as per invoices have been recovered therefore the en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be faulted. Nothing has been placed before us to show that the appellants profit would not result in loss, if the refund is not granted. The very fact that the excise duty discharge under protest has been shown in the Balance Sheet under the head 'Deposits and Investments' cannot lead to a conclusion that return of this 'deposit' would be 'unjust enrichment'. It would be justified 'Profit' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
