2017 (12) TMI 315

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ingh (Supdt.) AR - for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar Present appeal is arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.123/CE/ALLD/2007 dated 08/06/2007 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Allahabad. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant were manufacturer of chemicals falling under Chapter 28, 29 and 38 of scheduled to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uld not establish that burden was not passed on to the customer and, therefore, the Original Authority has held that refund was not admissible in view of provisions of unjust enrichment under Section 11B and Section 12B of Central Excise Act, 1944. Aggrieved by the said order appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that it is established be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nted said two grounds of appeal. 5. Heard the learned AR who has supported the impugned Order-in-Appeal. 6. Having considered the rival contentions and on perusal of records we do not find that there was any order on record establishing provisional assessment of the goods and order finalizing the provisional assessments. We therefore, find that the contention of the appellant that since the duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X