2011 (8) TMI 1004

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....acts in Nutshell : 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter 40 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The excisable goods are liable for duty an ad valorem basis and the value is being determined under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "CEA, 1944") for the excisable goods manufactured by them for the purpose of payment of duty at the time of removal. 3. The appellant for the periods 1996-97 and 1997-98 adopted assessable value, which was more than the assessable value determined under Section 4 of CEA, 1944 in respect of clearance. It was later realised that the excise duty has been paid higher than the value, which should have been adopted for t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....customers did not reimburse the excise duty as shown in the invoice but paid less excise duty on the plea that incorrect assessable value has been adopted in the invoice? (ii) Whether credit note for excess excise duty shown in the invoice (so as to regularize the transaction in the books of accounts of the manufacturer) can be considered as credit note issued for refund of excise duty even while the excess duty (charged in the invoice) was not paid by the customer?" Submissions : 7. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the CESTAT grievously erred in its decision regarding refund, in spite of the credit notes issued by the appellant showing that the appellant has borne the duty incidence themselves. According to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orne by them, the Assessing Authority disbelieved their case and rejected the refund claim. 11. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the case of the appellant. However, the fact remains that no additional materials were produced before the Appellate Authority to substantiate the contention of the appellant regarding the excise duty paid by them. The appellant has no case that other than the credit notes they have produced other primary materials in support of their claim for refund. The Commissioner (Appeals) without discussing the materials considered to arrive at a factual conclusion, allowed the appeals solely on the ground that the credit notes issued by the appellant indicates that the duty burden has not been passed on to the con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in Union of India v. A.K. Spintex Ltd., 2009 (234) E.L.T. 41 (Raj.) in support of his contention that in case the assessee issues credit notes and claimed duty paid by them in excess, the price of goods stand reduced on issuance of such credit notes and the billed amount minus amount of credit notes becomes the price of goods. 16. The issue before the Rajasthan High Court in A.K. Spintex Ltd., was regarding the burden of proof on the side of parties to prove that there was no unjust enrichment. In the said case, the High Court found that the customer had issued the debit notes and it was followed by credit notes issued by the assessee. The High Court in paragraph 7 of the judgment very clearly observed that it was not disputed on the ....