TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (6) TMI 444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der]. - The appellants are manufacturers of sulphuric acid. They had cleared 510.26 MTs of sulphuric acid to a customer at the rate of Rs. 1,300/- PMT in the month of May, 1997. Again, in the month of June, 1997, they cleared 722.595 MTs of sulphuric acid to the same customer at the rate of Rs. 1,250/- PMT. In respect of the first clearance, a mistake as to unit price was noted by the appel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t note also, the appellants raised a refund claim on the department. These claims amount to Rs. 8,941/-. The department proposed to reject this claim vide show cause notice dated 7-1-98 under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act as well as on the following factual grounds : (a) In respect of the first clearance, it was not proved that the contracted sale price was Rs. 1,2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(153) E.L.T. 694 (Tri. - LB). Hence the present appeal.  3.Heard both sides. Ld. Counsel submits that the grounds raised by the department in the show cause notice for rejecting the refund claims were rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) and that the department is not aggrieved by this decision of the appellate authority. It is his further contention that the ground on which the appellate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the claim was not hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. It is further submitted by ld. SDR that the show cause notice had proposed to reject the appellant's refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, thereby proposing to reject the claims on the ground of unjust enrichment.  4.After giving careful consideration to the submissions, I find that the factual grounds raised for reje....