9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that earlier appeal of refund claim of the appellant has been remanded on the specific ground that appellant is entitled for refund of service tax as claimed by them subject to the condition that the appellant shall provide the evidence, upto the satisfaction of refund sanctioning authority that incidence of tax has not been passed on by the appellant to any other person and it was also made clear that the onus of proof was on the appellant to prove that they had not passed on the burden of tax incidence to any other person. 8. I find that the show cause notice has been issued to the appellant to provide opportunity to produce documentary evidence of the service tax amount has not been passed on by them. I find that the appellant has subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited who has paid this service tax has passed on the incidence of this tax to the ultimate users, unless proved otherwise. In this regard I rely upon ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 29.08.2016, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras vs. Addison & Co. Ltd., -2016 (339) ELT 177 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has decided the issue of 'unjust enrichment' in similar circumstances. The relevant head note of the said decision is reproduced as under:- "Refund - Unjust enrichment - Credit note to buyer for turnover discount - Duty component in turnover discount - assessee admitted that incidence of duty was originally passed on to buyer - No material brought on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order." 2. The brief facts are that the appellant has been awarded canteen services contract from M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited, by way of running and managing their canteen located in their factory premises. The only issue involved in this appeal is under the facts and circumstances that - initially M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited paid the service tax to the appellant - service provider and later on the assumption that the said service is exempt, have deducted the amount of service tax admittedly from the subsequent bills of the appellant, which has been reflected in the ledger account of this appellant maintained in the books of M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited. The refund has been rejected on the presumption that the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
