Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (8) TMI 1059 - AT - Central ExciseRefund claim - unjust enrichment - price variation clause - Held that: - the duty incidence has not been passed by the appellant to its customers - in the case of UOI v. A.K. Spintex Ltd. [2008 (11) TMI 89 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT], the Court is also of the view that after issuance of the debit note by their customers and the corresponding credit note by seller, the price of the goods stood reduced to the extent of debit/credit note and in such circumstances the incidence of duty could not have been assumed to have been passed on to the buyer. In this case also, the credit not was issued to the buyer and the payment has also been realized by the appellant after the adjustment of the credit note. The incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. The refund claim is not hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|