9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 879X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing substantial question of law:- "Whether, in facts and circumstances of present case, impugned order passed by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi has correctly held that claim of appellant is hit by unjust enrichment and appellant failed to prove that duty burden has not been passed ignoring the evidence of records in the form of Books of Accounts, certificate from Oil marketing PSUs, especially in the backdrop of presumptive statutory provisions under Section 12B of Central Excise Act, 1944?" The entire controversy revolves around the mandate as contained under Section 12B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. For ready reference, Section 12B is quoted hereinbelow:- "12B. Presumption that incidence of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son who has paid the duty of excise on any goods, at the time of sale of such goods passed on the incidence of duty onto the buyer, unless contrary is proved by him. All the three forums below have reached the conclusion that nothing concrete had been submitted by the assessee that excess excise duty of Rs.32,65,057/- for the relevant period Jan. 1999 to October 1999, has not been recovered from the buyers. The certificate dated 9/3/2004 issued by the Chartered Accountant with annexures indicates details of Basic Price & Excise Duty as per invoices, details of Basic Price & Excise duty received as payment and short recovery of duty. However, the assessee/party has not produced any certificate from their customers for the relevant period th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the party mentioning that :- "It is observed that the Appellants have filed refund claim of Rs.1,31,900/- on the grounds that excess excise duty was paid by them on the clearance of domestic packed LPG from 22.11.2000 to 23.11.2000 at the higher rate of price instead at revised price effective from 22.11.2000. The contention of the Appellants s that the price of LPG being fixed by the Oil Coordination Committee (OCC), neither they nor the buyer PSU had any authority to decide LPG prices and no one can collect more duty and no buyer will reimburse more duty then fixed by the Government. The facts on records clearly indicate that they had raised invoices in which duty was shown at higher level, the refund of which has been sought by them. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hemicals Division) v. CCE, Bhopal - 2003 (153) ELT 694 (Tribunal - LB) to hold that in such cases where duty incidence was initially passed on to buyers and credit notes were issued later, the bar of unjust enrichment was attracted. The decisions cited by the Appellants, therefore, are not applicable in their case. In the present Appeal, the Appellants do not appear even to have issued credit notes. The ratio of the judgments cover the matter against the Appellants inasmuch as initially they had invoiced the entire amount of duty to their buyers and the excess duty in respect of which refund claim was filed is being shown as recoverable. Accordingly, I hold that the refund claim has correctly been rejected by the Adjudicating Authority." " ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
