Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 173 - AT - Central ExciseRefund of Excise duty - refund claims have been rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment - HELD THAT:- Clause 7 gives the right to the buyer that the buyer with a notice to the supplier can make a reasonable adjustment in price or other terms as a result of any such change. The said clause does not talk about any composition/design etc. It says only that if they want to reduce the price, they will give notice to the supplier and price can be reduced. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS VERSUS M/S ADDISON & CO. LTD. [2016 (8) TMI 1071 - SUPREME COURT], wherein it has been held that if the assessee is able to prove that the ultimate buyer of the goods have not borne the duty components, refund can be claimed - Admittedly in the case, in hand the buyer M/s Ashok Leyland Ltd. was the ultimate consumer of the parts which have been used by them to manufacture the vehicles. Therefore, the appellant is able to prove that duty component has not been passed on the buyer, as the buyer has issued debit note to them for duty component. In that circumstances, the appellant is entitled to claim refund of excess duty paid at the time of clearance of the goods. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|