Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (6) TMI 153 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (6) TMI 153 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - 2015 (329) E.L.T. 390 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - Denial of refund claim - unjust enrichment - appellant had not furnished sufficient evidence that the incidence of duty was not passed on to their customers - Held that:- The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the appellant have not submitted the details as to how they arrived at the pricing of the material at the time of bidding for the award of contract with their customer. He further observed that how the payment o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

considered view, there is no need to furnish the cost of material and pricing of the contract. It will be necessary in the case, when the Auditor s certificate is not accepted as incomplete or any other reason.

Nuclear Power Corporation Limited, a Government of India Enterprise had confirmed that they have not reimbursed any Excise Duty to the appellant against the excise duty paid on the invoices of the manufacturer. Thus, the other person in Section 11B(1), has certified that they h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

For the Appellant : Shri Keval Shah, Chartered Accountant For the Respondent : Shri Alok Srivastava, Authorised Representative ORDER Per : Mr. P.K. Das; The appellant filed this appeal against the rejection of refund claim, on the ground that they could not produce any evidence to substantiate that they have not passed the incidence of duty to the customers. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants were engaged in the construction of Turbine Building, CCW Plant, Pump .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

undertaken by M/s. PSL does not amount to manufacture. By letter dated 12.09.2003, M/s. PSL informed that the appellant had paid the Central Excise duty and therefore, they are eligible to get the refund of duty under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, the appellant filed refund claim for ₹ 20,45,807/-. 3. A show cause notice was issued proposing to reject the refund claim. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim on the ground that the appellant have not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

clear Power Corporation Limited, by certificate dated 10.12.2003 confirmed that they have not reimbursed the excise duty to the appellant. He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously proceeded on the basis that the appellant have not produced the costing of products. It is his submission that Chartered Accountant after examining the books of accounts certified that duty amount was not reimbursed by the customer. Hence, it is not the domain of the Central Excise authorities to ask for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

goods. He relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Mumbai-II vs. Allied Photographic India Limited 2004 (166) ELT 3 (SC). 6. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the manufacturer paid the duty under protest. They have requested the appellant to claim the refund as the duty element was borne by the appellant. The refund claim was rejected on the ground that the appellant had not furnished sufficient evidence that the incidence of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the appellant have not submitted the details as to how they arrived at the pricing of the material at the time of bidding for the award of contract with their customer. He further observed that how the payment of excise duty made by the appellant was treated in computation of their pricing and in their books of accounts. I find that after examining the books of accounts, the auditor by certificate dated 27.4.2004 had certified that no part of duty paid by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the expressions the applicant may furnish to establish , if read with the incidence of such duty and interest, if any, paid on such duty had not been passed on by him to any other person , in sub-Section(1) of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, make it clear that the applicant is required to produce the evidence that the other person had not paid the duty amount to the applicant. In present case, the appellant discharged the burden by producing certificate dated 10.12.2003 from th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version