9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excise duty paid on concrete poles manufactured through job workers and captively consumed by Respondent KSEB. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that refund is not hit by bar of unjust enrichment as the KSEB has captively consumed concrete poles on which they had paid duty. The revenue challenges the findings of the Commissioner in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of the present case are similar to the case covered by the CEGAT's decision relied on by the learned Advocate. In the above-mentioned order, it has been observed as follows : Section 12B referred to by the Counsel reads'Para 2 thus :- "Presumption that the incidence of duty has been passed on to the buyers. - Every person who has paid the duty of excise on any goods under this Act shall, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other person" under Section 11B did not arise. The admissibility of the refund claim is otherwise not in question. Therefore, the claim, not hit by any bar of unjust enrichment under Section 11B, has to be allowed in absolute terms as rightly held by the lower appellate authority. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is, therefore sustained and the present appeal is rejected.' The respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t duty paid on all types of goods viz. capital goods, final goods and inputs, hence duty paid on capital goods are covered within the ambit of unjust enrichment. In view of the above decision, it is for the respondents to show that they have not passed on the duty burden to the ultimate consumers. No doubt the concrete poles have been captively consumed. But while fixing the electricity tariff, fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
