TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecovered any amount towards duty over and above invoices price from the buyers. Apart from bar of unjust enrichment the respondent has produced a certificate from the Cost Accountant that no amount over and above invoices price has been received from the buyers and the same does not form a part of cost of production. In these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity and the same is upheld. - Decided against Revenue. - E/2738/2006-Mum - Final Order No. A/739/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 28-3-2014 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) Shri D.D. Joshi, Supdt. (AR), for the Appellant. Shri T.C. Nair, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicable on principle of equity. He also relies on the decisions in the case of Union of India v. Solar Pesticides Pvt. Ltd. - 2000 (116) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.), CCE v. Allied Photographics India Ltd. - 2004 (166) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) and Pride Foramer v. CC - 2006 (200) E.L.T. 259 (Tri. Mumbai) = 2008 (12) S.T.R. 657 (Tri.). The learned A.R. also submits that as the respondent has shown the amount of duty as revenue expenditure therefore, the same has formed the part of cost of production and the incidence of duty has been passed on to the buyers. 5. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that in this case the goods have been cleared and thereafter duty was demanded from them which was paid during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he respondent has not received any amount over and above the amount shown in the invoices at the time of clearance. These facts are also not in dispute. The additional duty has been paid by the respondent at various appellate stages. The Revenue has also not produced any evidence on record that the respondent has recovered any amount towards duty over and above invoices price from the buyers. Further the case law relied on by the learned A.R. in the case of Solar Pesticides Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is not relevant to the facts of the case. In that case duty was required to be paid on captively consumed goods. Because duty paid on captively consumed goods automatically forms the part of cost of production. Here that is not the case. Further in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
