TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (10) TMI 709
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er]. - This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. 19/2009, dated 20-2-2009. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the respondents herein, during the period 13-10-2006 to 23-1-2007, were paying cess on the agricultural products exported i.e. exports of Frozen Sea Foods under the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iginal. The Revenue was aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original and they preferred an appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), after considering the submissions made by both sides, came to the conclusion that the Order-in-Original is correct and coming to such conclusion rejected the appeal filed by Revenue. Hence this appeal. 3. Ld. DR appearing on behalf of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....there is no evidence on record to prove that the amount short realized is attributable to the amount of Cess paid. In principle, FOB value includes all costs including taxes paid by the exporter. 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in holding that the appellants have not adduced any evidence to prove that the respondent has passed on the incidence of Cess to their buyers, in as much as t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Revenue. 5. After considering the submissions made by both sides and perusal of the records, I find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the refund of an amount which has been paid by the respondent under mistake. It is undisputed that the amount paid by the appellant during the relevant period 13-10-2006 to 23-1-2007, and is not liable to pay the cess under the Agricultura....