TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 411X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... forgings and castings received from the principal manufacturer. The appellants are working under the provisions of Notification 214/86-CE. In the show-cause notice the fact is admitted. The activity undertaken by the appellant is a part of manufacturing process and the principal manufacturer was paying duty on the goods processed by the appellants. Therefore we find that the appellants are not li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (AR) PER : S S Kang Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection of refund claim on merit as well on unjust enrichment. 3. During the period in dispute, the appellant paid the service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Service after getting registration with Revenue. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the appellant issued credit note for accounting purpose only. Hence the appellant has not passed on the burden of duty. 4. The Revenue relied upon the findings of the lower authorities. The learned A.R. submitted that as the appellant has shown the amount of service tax separately on the invoices therefore the onus falls on the appellant to prove that the burden of tax has not been passed onto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is period. In respect of unjust enrichment, we find that the appellant admitted the fact that though the amount of service tax was shown in the invoice but not received by them. In view of the above facts, we find the matter requires reconsideration by the adjudicating authority regarding unjust enrichment. The issue unjust enrichment is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
