TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A/71850-71851/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 2-11-2017 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Aalok Arora, Advocate, for Appellant Shri Mohammad Altaf, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The issue involved in these appeals filed by the appellant-manufacturers is whether the refund claim made by them is hit by the doctrine of unjust-enrichment. 2. Both the appeals arise from the separate impugned orders but as the issue is common, they are taken up together for disposal. For the sake of convenience, we mention the facts from the appeal of M/s Keshav Resin Coats Pvt. Ltd., are as under:- 3. The appellant are unregistered unit man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (121) ELT 3 (SC) and reject the refund of the interest amounting to ₹ 25,498/- in as much the provisions related to the refund of interest came into force with effect from 10.05.2008 while the interest was paid by the appellant on 28.01.2008. 3. Being aggrieved, Revenue preferred appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that in view of the ruling of Honble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Amrit Agro Industries Ltd. Vs CCE, Ghaziabad reported at 2007 (210) ELT 183 (SC) wherein it have been held that unless it is shown by a manufacturer that price of goods includes excise duty payable by him, no question of exclusion of duty element from the price will arise for determination of value under Section 4 (4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice sales tax have been added. The learned counsel further states that in view of the ruling of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Vs Maruti Udyog Ltd. (supra) unless the Central Excise duty or tax is separately shown in the invoice, it has to be considered as cum-duty price. Accordingly, appellant claimed the refund of the excess duty paid under the facts and circumstances. It is further evident from the facts on record that no further amount having been collected after raising of invoices and duty have been paid subsequently, doctrine of unjust-enrichment is not applicable. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing the appeal, with consequential relief. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that the appellants her ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
