Appellant established that incidence of duty was not passed on ...

Refund: Unjust enrich Invoices - didn't mention duty. Stock transfers between units. Appellant bore duty burden. Price difference due to gold rate. Refund eligible.

Case Laws Central Excise

July 13, 2024

Appellant established that incidence of duty was not passed on to customers. Refund sanctioning authority's report confirmed duty was not mentioned on invoices issued to customers from depot. Clearances from factory to depot were stock transfers within appellant's units. Appellant bore burden of duty without collecting it from customers. Difference in clearance values was due to gold price fluctuation, not valuation issue. Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding incidence of duty was passed on to customers, barring refund on unjust enrichment grounds. Appellant is eligible for refund. Order crediting amount to Consumer Welfare Fund set aside. Appeal allowed, refund to be granted to appellant.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Appellant established that incidence of duty was not passed on ...

Refund: Unjust enrich Invoices - didn't mention duty. Stock transfers between units. Appellant bore duty burden. Price difference due to gold rate. Refund eligible.

Case Laws Central Excise

July 13, 2024

You may also like:

Refund claim - when invoice showed duty and ex-duty price separately in invoice and on scrap being held non-excisable, refund of duty shown in invoice is not hit by bar...

Show cause notice demanding interest was confirmed by the original Adjudicating Authority and settled under SVLDRS Scheme, thus refund of the confirmed amount does not...

Denial of refund claim - Unjust enrichment - Duty paid twice - e appellants are entitled for refund claim for duty paid on Ethanol - unjust enrichment is not applicable - AT

Duty refund claimed based on affidavit and certificate was inappropriate. Revenue did not dispute discharge of duty by appellant on revised invoice. Appellant...

CESTAT NEW DELHI addressed unjust enrichment in a refund claim. The appellant sought a refund of Rs. 1,23,70,024 u/s the Tribunal's order. The appellant failed to prove...

Refund of excess tax / duty paid - downward price revision based on the negative supplementary invoices - The assessee has furnished the supplementary invoices for the...

Refund claim - unjust enrichment - value of the software is includable in the assessable value of hardware or not - The duty and the value are shown in the face of...

Refund claim - excise duty paid wrongly - The entry was made debiting the excise duty without actually collecting the excise duty - they have not paid the excise duty...

Refund claims – unjust enrichment – service tax paid under protest – refund allowed - AT

Refund - when the iron ore was exported on payment of duty on FOB value, the refund of excess customs duty paid does not attract bar of unjust enrichment - refund allowed.

Refund claim on courier service used for export of goods - objection is only that in the invoices issued by the courier agency service, export invoice number & IEC code...

Refund - Notification No. 17/2009-ST - While the bank realisation certificate does not mention the shipping bill number, it does mention the invoice number and date and...

Refund of export duty paid in excess - conclusive evidence to discharge the burden of unjust enrichment - The CESTAT observed that the contract between the buyer and...

Power to issue SCN - Recovery of erroneous refund with interest - It is more than apparent that section 11A of the Excise Act cannot be resorted to by the Department for...

Refund - unjust enrichment - excise duty has not been claimed from the buyer of the goods and the same has been reflected in “Excise Duty Refund Receivable Account” -...

Quick Updates: