TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount, in question, had not been reflected by the respondent under the heads of account of Loans & Advances, as “claims receivable” from the Central Excise Department. There is no merit in the impugned order, so far as it allowed the refund benefit in favour of the respondent - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue. - APPEAL NO. E/85383/18, E/Cross/85409/18 - A/86733/2018 - Dated:- 28-5-2018 - SHRI S K MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent (AR) for Appellant Shri Kranti Rathi, Advocate for Respondent ORDER Per: S K Mohanty Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order dated 09.05.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals), Pune. 2. Brief facts of the case are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the Tribunal. 2. Learned DR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the submissions made in the grounds of appeal annexed to be appeal memorandum and further submits that the respondent had recovered the differential Central Excise duty through debit notes and thus, incidence of duty had been passed on to the buyers. Hence, he submits that the refund claim is hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment and instead of refunding the claimed amount to the respondent; the same should be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund (CWF). In support of above submissions, the Learned DR has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras Vs. M/s Addision Co. Ltd. 2016 (339) ELT 177 (SC) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Welfare Fund. Further, on perusal of the Balance Sheet for the year 2005-06, I find that refund amount, in question, had not been reflected by the respondent under the heads of account of Loans Advances, as claims receivable from the Central Excise Department. I find that the judgment relied upon by the Learned DR for the Revenue squarely applies to the facts of the present case in support of credit of refund amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund. 6. In view of above discussion and analysis, I do find any merit in the impugned order, so far as it allowed the refund benefit in favour of the respondent. Therefore, after setting aside the impugned order, the appeal filed by Revenue is allowed. Cross objection filed by the respondent is d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
