2015 (5) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sment on the clearances of intermediate products viz. stampings, laminations, cast articles manufactured and cleared to their own sister unit on payment of duty by following valuation under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules. The adjudicating authority has finalized the provisional assessment for the period from April 2000 to March 2001 in the first appeal and April 2001 to March 2002 and sanctioned refund of Rs. 8,93,519/- and Rs. 27,51,148/- respectively and credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund vide respective adjudication orders. The respondent preferred appeals and the Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned orders dt. 20.4.2004 and 11.11.2005 respectively allowed the appeals with consequential relief. Hence Revenue filed the present appeals....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6,7, 8 of the OIA. He relied on the following case laws :- 1) Collector Vs Metro Tyres Ltd. 1997 (94) ELT A51(SC) 2) CCE, Chandigarh Vs Metro Tyres Ltd. 1996 (82) ELT 95 (T) 3) Swarup Fibre Industries Ltd. Vs CCE Meerut 2000 (120) ELT 510 (Tribunal). 4) CCE Kanpur Vs Corona Cosmetics & Chemicals (P) Ltd. - 2000 (118) ELT 356 (Tribunal) 5. I have carefully considered the submission of both sides. The short issue in this case is as to whether refund sanctioned allowed in the impugned order is hit by unjust enrichment or not. There is no dispute on the fact that respondents opted for provisional assessment for the intermediate product manufactured by them and supplied to their own sister unit for manufacture of the final product....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the price of stampings on the basis of cost of relevant raw materials. It is seen from the records available on file that the appellants have filed a refund calculation for the year 2001-02 wherein details like provisional price of stampings and its final price were arrived on the basis of cost construction. The provisional assessment involves different types of stampings and the difference between the provisional price and final price given in respect of those models vary. Though the finalisation of assessment has in general resulted in excess payment of duty, it has also caused short payment in some types of stampings as in the case of models SM 132 6 and SM 1604 and the adjudicating authority has in fact allowed the adjustment of excess....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e respondents have discharged burden that incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. The contention of the respondents is that the invoices were showing the composite price of the goods and the price of the goods remained the same during the period in question and prior to that. The Tribunal in the case of C.C.E. v. Metro Tyres Ltd. (supra) on similar facts, held that the assessees  invoices during the material period showing the composite price and duty not indicated separately, itself is sufficient to show that incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. This view was followed by the Tribunal in another case i.e. C.C.E. v. Metro Tyres Ltd. reported in 1996 (82) E.L.T. 95 and the appeal filed by the reve....