TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 765X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer authorities that though the imported goods were used captively but the price of the final product was not changed due to payment of duty on the imported goods. Moreover the appellant has produced C.A. certificate certifying that incidence of duty paid by the appellant has not been passed on to consumer. The appellant had also submitted that the price of the medicine manufactured out of the imported input i.e. DPCO price which is fixed by the government and therefore extra payment of duty does not influence the DPCO price of the goods. We observed that both the lower authorities have not considered all these above submission in the proper perspective as no finding was given on the aforesaid submission made by the appellant. Both the lowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sea) remanded the matter for denovo consideration. The adjudicating authority once again rejected the refund claim on the ground that imported goods were consumed in the manufacture of final product and in case of captive consumption unjust enrichment is applicable as held by the Hon ble Apex Court in case of Union of India Vs. Solar Pesticide Pvt Ltd.[2000(116) ELT 401(SC)] In his findings, he has just passed reference that the appellant were unable to prove that incidence of duty has not been passed on to the buyer of the said goods. Being aggrieved by the denovo adjudication Order-in-Original dated 16-2-2001, an appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) which came to be rejected by upholding the Order-in-Original therefore t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udgment of Hon ble Apex Court in case of Solar Pesticide Pvt Ltd(supra) . Here the issue is not that whether the provision of unjust enrichment is applicable or otherwise but matter has to be examined on the factual matrix in the facts narrated by the appellant, whether the incidence of the duty has passed on or otherwise, which both the lower authorities have failed to address. We therefore find that this is a fit case for remand to the original adjudicating authority who should consider all the submission made by the appellant and give cogent findings regarding the passing/not passing of incidence of duty paid on the imported goods. We therefore set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
