2003 (5) TMI 397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ichment and to credit the amounts to the consumer welfare fund.  The authority has held that refund amount of Rs. 99,994/- and Rs. 5,68,751/- is held to be available but is hit by unjust enrichment. The appellants case is that duty paid has not been passed on to the consumer and they are entitled to receive the same from the hands of the Revenue and that it should not be credited to the consumer welfare fund. It is their contention that the price during the period was constant and that the duty which was paid on the intermediate product was not passed on to the consumer nor it was recovered from the manufacturing cost. That the cost was not arrived at before the payment of duty or added on the intermediate product. They state that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....LT 643 wherein it has been held that doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable to refund arising out of finalisation of provisional assessments. It has also been held that the refund of duty paid on inputs is claimed price of final product has remained same or reduced after appellants started paying duty on inputs in view of the Chartered Accountant Certified that duty incidence was not passed on. In these facts and circumstances refund is admissible, as the incidence of duty is not passed on to the consumer. He also relied on the judgment rendered in the case of CCE reported in 2000 (39) RLT 594 wherein it has been held that where the incidence of duty is not passed on to the consumer as invoice was shown that the same price during t....