Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 786 - CESTAT MUMBAIWhether duty collected without authority of law is exempted from the requirement of ascertainment of having borne the incidence of duty in disposing off claim for refund of this amount and, if not, whether the competent authority did comply with statutory requirements thereon? - Held that: - The proper course of action to be pursued when the applicant for refund has not been able to satisfy that duty collected without authority of law has not been passed on to customers is to sanction the refund and credit it to the Fund. For having failed to notice this departure from legality and propriety and for not remedying the flaw, the impugned order is liable to be set aside - It is surprising that the authorities empowered to review the two orders also failed to enable the necessary rectification despite being mandated to call for and examine orders-in-original and orders-in-appeal to ascertain their legality and propriety. Apparently, an order that was not detrimental to revenue, no matter its abundance of illegality, is justification sufficient for disregarding statutorily mandated obligations. We suggest that the Central Board of Excise & Customs issue suitable instructions to its field formations to avoid recurrence of such blatant disinclination to discharge duties of office. We set aside the impugned order and restore the refund application to the competent authority to examine, issue appropriate notice, if warranted, and pass fresh orders in accordance with the law - appeal allowed by way of remand.
|