Refund claim fails where assessee cannot prove duty incidence was not passed on to the buyer.

Refund was not maintainable where the assessee failed to prove that the incidence of duty had not been passed on to the buyer. The burden to establish non-passing of the duty burden lay on the claimant, and absence from the proceedings plus non-production of records did not discharge that burden. On that merits-based ground, the refund claim was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was liable to be rejected for failure to establish that the incidence of duty had not been passed on to the buyer.

Analysis: The appellants remained absent and did not produce evidence to show non-passing of the duty burden. The onus to establish that the burden of duty had not been passed on lay on the assessee, and the explanation for non-production of records was not accepted as a basis to displace that burden.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not maintainable on merits and the appeal was rejected.

---