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

2016 (8) TMI 34 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (8) TMI 34 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (340) E.L.T. 570 (Tri. - Del.) - Refund - unjust enrichment - valuation dispute was decided in favor of assessee - Pan Masala not containing tobacco and beetle nut not more than 10% - Held that:- In as much as various invoices clearly indicate the quantum of duty charged and passed on to the customers, it is to be inferred that the excess amount of duty now arrived at as refundable has been passed on to the ultimate customers. The various case laws relie .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

st of unjust enrichment - Decided against the assessee. - E/3466-3467/2005-EX(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 52381-52382/2016-EX(DB) - Dated:- 28-6-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Shri V.Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri O.P. Aggarwal, Advocate for the Appellants Shri R.K. Manjhi, DR for the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is against the order in appeal dated 11.08.2005 passed by the Commissioner (A) Jaipur. The appellant is a manufacturer of Sada Pan Masala falling under sub head .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(NT) dated 02.06.1998. Accordingly, the valuation was to be done in terms of the section 4 of the Central Excise Act 1944 and not under section 4A ibid. In the light of above decision of the Honble Tribunal the appellants filed refund claims before the Assistant Commissioner which were held to be admissible on merit. Further, the original authority vide his order dated 10.12.2004 sanctioned the refund claim but ordered to credit the amounts to the Consumer Welfare Fund applying the principle 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

ties are to be considered to have been borne by them. 3. We have heard Shri O.P. Agarwal, CA for the appellant and Shri R.K. Manjhi, Ld. DR. The submission of the Ld. Counsel is that the MRP of the pouches of pan masala is constant and even the wholesale prices also remains so. He submitted that since the duty incidence has been worked out backwards to arrive at the duty payable under section 4 and also worked out the lower amount payable, they have not passed on the incidence of duty to their c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on the following case laws: i. Girish Foods & Beverages (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE Pune-2007 (211) ELT 388 (Trib). ii. Dupen Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CCE 2014 (301) ELT 344 (Tri) iii. Karnataka Antibiotics & Pharmaceuticals Vs. CCE 1996 (83) ELT 114 (Tri). iv. CCE Vs. Crane Betel Nut Powder 2009 (15) STR 527 (Tri). 4. The Ld. DR on the other hand argued that simply because MRP has remained constant it cannot be presumed that the incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. He cited the .....

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