9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter hearing both sides on the application for stay of operation of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), by which he has held that the bar of unjust enrichment will not operate against the respondents herein and therefore they are entitled to the refund of Rs. 1,06,826/- paid by them on 15-1-1998 in respect of clearances of pre-recorded video cassettes made between March to December, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r cassettes to blank cassettes. 3. On 12-03-2001 the company filed the claim for refund which was decided by the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise in their favour on merits, but however, the Dy. Commissioner held that the company had failed to produce substantial documentary evidence to establish that the amount for which refund was claimed was not collected from their customers, in spite of pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he subject dispute relates to the period between March, 1997 to December, 1997. At the relevant time, appellants had not obtained any registration from Central Excise authorities and, therefore, the question of discharge of Central Excise duty does not arise on the disputed clearance. Also, it is reported in the impugned order that the said amount of Rs. 1,06,826/- was paid by the appellants on TR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Dy. Commissioner and allowed the appeal of the company. Hence this appeal and stay application by the Revenue. 5. According to the Revenue the Commissioner (Appeals) ought not to have sanctioned the claim by accepting the Chartered Accountant's certificate as this was not sufficient for the purpose of establishing that the burden of duty had not been passed on by the respondents to their cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
