https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762768 CESTAT Chennai allowed appellant's appeal for refund of excess excise duty paid inadvertently during February-March 2013 clearances to institutional buyers. Though appellant initially failed to prove tax burden wasn't passed to buyers, tribunal found the claim involved double payment of excise duty only, easily verifiable from invoices and predetermined cum-duty prices. Since buyers agreed to fixed cum-duty prices, passing on excess duty was unlikely. Tribunal set aside original order, remanded matter to Original Authority for fresh decision considering all documents including CA statement, emphasizing substantive benefits shouldn't be denied on technical grounds. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Dec 2024 08:14:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762768 CESTAT Chennai allowed appellant's appeal for refund of excess excise duty paid inadvertently during February-March 2013 clearances to institutional buyers. Though appellant initially failed to prove tax burden wasn't passed to buyers, tribunal found the claim involved double payment of excise duty only, easily verifiable from invoices and predetermined cum-duty prices. Since buyers agreed to fixed cum-duty prices, passing on excess duty was unlikely. Tribunal set aside original order, remanded matter to Original Authority for fresh decision considering all documents including CA statement, emphasizing substantive benefits shouldn't be denied on technical grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762768