9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 703X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ]. - After examining the records and hearing both sides, I find that the lower authorities have declined cash refund of an amount of Rs. 1,65,000/- to the appellant on the ground of unjust enrichment. It was on the strength of an order of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessee, who was the appellant before the appellate Commissioner, claimed refund of the above amount comprising fine and p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lash; CCE, Hyderabad v. Talsila Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. - 2007 (210) E.L.T. 229 (Tri.-Bang.) Ø CCE, Guntur v. Empee Sugar & Chemicals Ltd. - 2007 (211) E.L.T. 293 (Tri.-Bang.) = 2007 (7) S.T.R. 622 (Tri. - Bang.) Ø Bombay Trading Co. v. CCE, Cochin - 2007 (213) E.L.T. 177 (Tri.-Bang.) &Oslas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of the company, wherein redemption fine and penalty were shown as items of expenditure. It is submitted that these items of expenditure should be presumed to have been reckoned in the costing of excisable products thereby paving the way for transmission of the incidence of duty to the buyers. 3. I have given careful consideration to the submissions. It is not the case of the appellant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es. From this, it would appear that some of the expenses shown on the debit side might have been passed on to the buyers of the goods reflected on the credit side. In this scenario, there is an onerous burden on the party to show that the burden of fine and penalty was not passed on to the buyers of the goods. In my view, there is another presumption against the appellant, which is that a personal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
