Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Hawkins Cookers Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III

2016 (11) TMI 1272 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Unjust enrichment - refund of credit which was reversed under protest during dispute - Held that: - I find that the original dispute raised by the department is that the admissibility of Cenvat credit in respect of packing material. Due to the dispute, appellant reversed the Cenvat credit. Tribunal. Accordingly, amount reversed was claimed as a refund. I find that this is not a case of refund of excise duty paid on final product whereas originally it is an amount of Cenvat credit which was rever .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

enrichment. - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee. - APPEAL NO.E/1483/12 - Order No.A/93058/16/SMB - Dated:- 13-6-2016 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (J) Shri. Mihir Mehta, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Respondent Order The fact of the present case is that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. Pressure Cooker. The appellant cleared the manufactured goods to the depot for the purpose of sale. The g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the appellant's depot and some are dispatched to up country buyer. The cost of the master cartons is inbuilt in the transaction value as no additional arnount is recovered from the wholesale buyer for the cost of master cartons. Proceedings initiated disputing the Cenvat credit availed on such master cartons during which appellant deposited an amount of ₹ 4,73,859/- under protest in the RG 23 Pt. II register being amount of credit availed on packing material. The said proceedings by w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ribunal order dated 2-1-2008 appellant filed refund claim of ₹ 3,52,096/- for the period 13-5-2003 to May, 2005. The Original adjudicating authority by Order-in-Original dated 25-11-2011 credited the said refund by way of credit in the appellant's RG-23 Pt. -II account. Aggrieved by the said order dated 25-11-2011 Revenue filed appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) on the ground that Original adjudicating authority erred in holding that principle of unjust enrichment is not applicable. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unjust enrichment is not applicable in the present case. He submits that refund of duty paid on the inputs falls under clause (c), proviso to Section 2 of Section 11B. Accordingly, the said provisions of unjust enrichment in respect of the duty paid on the inputs is not applicable. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the following judgments: (a) commissioner of C. Ex. Pune-I Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd [2007(217) ELT 2906TH. Mumbai)] (b) Opel Alloys Pvt Ltd Vs. Commissioner C. Ex. ELT 40 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version