2011 (7) TMI 919

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al, Authorised Representative (SDR), for respondent Per: P.G. Chacko The appeal filed by the assessee is against denial of cash refund of an amount of duty as barred by unjust enrichment. The assessee claimed refund of duty of Rs.5,98,201/- and more in September 2001. The duty claimed as refund had been paid on an intermediate product of theirs, which was captively consumed in the manufactur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e final product. In this connection, the appellate authority further held that, even if it be assumed that the duty was not separately shown in the invoices, it had to be admitted that the selling price was always a cum-duty price unless the contrary was proved with documentary evidence. This point was sought to be buttressed by taking aid from case law. 2. The present appeal of the assessee is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oduce the balance sheets for the past period (May 1986 to January 1989) and also a certificate from the Chartered Accountant to prove that the incidence of duty had not been passed on to any other person. 4. The learned SDR points out that the balance sheets for the past period are crucial and the same were not produced before the authorities and hence their decision to credit the amount to Con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Hence we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and allow the appeal by way of remand with a direction to the original authority to dispose of the assessee's refund claim afresh after granting them a reasonable opportunity of adducing further documentary evidence against the bar of unjust enrichment and also similar opportunity of being personally heard. The assessee will be at liberty to p....