9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, Member (J)]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed these appeals against order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Since common issue is raised in these appeals, therefore, they are being taken up together. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under. The appellant filed a refund claim on 13-12-2002 in pursuance to the Final Order passed by the Tribunal, whereby the demand a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time-barred and the appellant had not proved that the burden of duty has not been passed on to the customers. The demand was confirmed in respect of the credit taken by the appellant on the ground that the credit was taken without permission. 5. The appellant filed appeals and the same were dismissed. 6. The contention of the appellant is that the amount regarding which the refund was filed was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the Revenue is that the credit was taken without permission and the duty was not paid under protest, therefore, the impugned orders are sustainable. The contention of the Revenue is also that even in pursuance to the order passed by the Tribunal the appellants are to prove that the burden of duty has not been passed on to their customers. 8. The undisputed facts are that as a consequentia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Gujarat High Court in the case of Parle International Ltd., held that it cannot be said that the assessee has recovered amount from its customers the amounts subsequently deposited with the Revenue and this enriched itself by collecting such amount from the customers. The Hon'ble High Court further held that the amount deposited by the assessee during adjudication proceedings is to be regarded a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
