TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 614
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se while releasing the purchase order, the customer had quoted a higher price which was followed and clearances were made. According to the appellant during the month of March 2008, when they were finalizing the account, they had found out that there was a mistake in the purchase order and after this, the appellant themselves informed the customer of the higher price having been charged. Thereafter the customer revised the purchase order w.e.f.01/10/2007 and the differential amount along with Central Excise duty and VAT were adjusted in the amount that was payable by the customer to the appellant. Since the customer was a regular customer and had a running account, the amount was adjusted in the running account itself. After reconciliation,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hin six months and the fact that the refund claim was filed within one year would also show this. There seems to be some confusion in this regard. However on going through the documents, it is seen that there is no such delay in settlement. 4. The next ground taken by the Revenue for rejecting the refund claim is that the duty liability has been passed on to the ultimate customers i.e. customers who purchased readymade garments from the customers of the appellant. In this regard, I find that the submission of the Chartered Accountant that in the case of Addison & Co. Vs. CCE, Madras [2001(129) ELT 44 (Mad.)], Hon'ble High Court of Madras had considered this issue and had held that the Revenue cannot go beyond the first customer to decide w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was any excise duty paid by his supplier at all. Therefore, when the goods are totally exempt and only the manufacturer of inputs for readymade garments has paid the duty, the question of ultimate consumer claiming the refund does not arise because he would not be in a position to claim the same at all. However, in this case there is another aspect that is taken into account is that according to the correspondence taken place between the two parties, the assessee in this case after analyzing there was excess charge made by them indicated in their mail the price at which purchase order was issued actually related to the bigger boxes and there was a mistake on the part of the customer and the actual prices was only Rs. 5.20 per box + taxes ....