9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1012X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vinder Jain, Advocate for the respondent Revenue is in appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No: 203/ 2009/MCH/AC/Gr.VII (EP) /09-10 dated 05/08/2009 whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order-in-original No. 24/PK/AC/GR.VII(EP)/ 2007-08 dated 26/11/2008 allowing the refund of Rs. 1,25,599/- to the importer. 2. The learned JDR is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied for refund of duty which they have already paid. The adjudicating authority condoned the delay in such submission of the EODC and sanctioned the refund amount of Rs. 1,25,599/- which they have paid for not submitting the EODC in time. The department preferred an appeal against the said order of the adjudicating authority before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that question of unjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sanction of the refund amount. The department also relied on the Supreme Court in the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. 2005 (181) ELT 328 (SC). 5. The contention of the respondent is that there is no dispute that on merits they are eligible for the refund claim. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has given detailed finding so far as the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Section 28D provides that, every person who has paid the duty on any goods under this Act shall, unless the contrary is proved by him, be deemed to have passed on the full incidence of such duty to the buyer of such goods. The presumption envisaged under Section 28D pertain to payment of duty at the stage of clearance of the goods. In respect of the duty paid subsequent to the clearance of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
