Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2024 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 819 - AT - Central ExciseRefund of excess central excise duty paid - Principles of unjust enrichment - non-production of any evidence before the Central Excise authority to substantiate the claim that the incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers - HELD THAT:- From the findings recorded by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, it is found that the Appellant has not produced any other evidence other than CA’s Certificate to substantiate the claim of non-applicability of unjust enrichment in this case. The CA Certificate alone is not sufficient to conclude that 'unjust enrichment' is applicable in this case or not. This view has been held in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORTS) CUSTOM HOUSE, VERSUS 1. M/S. BPL LTD., 2. CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [2010 (7) TMI 66 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] it was held that Inasmuch as the Tribunal has merely relied upon the certificate of the Chartered Accountant and in order to give sufficient opportunity to first respondent while answering the question of law in favour of the revenue, the order passed by the Tribunal is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration of the appeal filed before it. The first respondent is permitted to furnish any other substantial evidence in support of his claim for refund. There are no reason to differ with the above findings in the impugned order to uphold the rejection of the refund claim. Accordingly, the Appellant is not eligible for the refund claim and the same has been rightly rejected in the impugned order. Appeal dismissed.
|