TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not been passed on to others. In these circumstances, there are no other option but to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) with a direction to analyze the Balance Sheet, Cost Accountant certificates to ascertain whether the burden of duty of ₹ 58,28,436/- has been passed on to others or otherwise - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No. 264 of 2010 - A/86687/2019 - Dated:- 4-9-2019 - Hon ble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Mr. Sanjiv Srivastava, Member (Technical) Shri Prakash Shah with Shri Mohit Raval, Advocates, for the Appellant Shri Ajay Kumar, Additional Commissioner, Authorised Representative f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 66,11,056/- on the ground of limitation and unjust enrichment. The appellant responded to the show cause notice contending that in case of inter-unit transfer, the refund of ₹ 58,28,436/- is not subject to unjust enrichment. However, the Assistant Commissioner by his order dated 18.07.2008 rejected the refund claim on limitation as well as unjust enrichment. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the refund on the ground of limitation. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeal before this Tribunal and this Tribunal after setting aside the order remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the claim on merits. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) rejected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before this Tribunal. On finalization of provisional assessment, the appellant was directed to take credit of the excess amount of ₹ 77,34,708/- paid during the assessment year 2002 to 2003 in their cenvat account. Later, the credit amount was directed to be reversed by the order of this Tribunal and the appellant was asked to file a separate refund claim. The present refund claim of ₹ 58,28,436/- relates to excess amount paid on inter-unit transfer of goods. We find that the appellant had placed sufficient evidences to support their claim that the amount has not been collected from their customers, in the form of Cost Accountant s certificates, respective Balance Sheet etc. However, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) without a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
