AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 948
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Nashik. The Revenue's Appeals bearing Nos. E/2740 and 2741 of 2004 have been allowed. 2. Mr. Sridharan, Senior Counsel appearing for the assessee submits that the questions of law formulated by the assessee at page 12 of this paper book are substantial questions of law. 3. In relation to that, he would submit that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that there was no evidence laid by the assessee to indicate that it had reversed the credit in respect of duty paid on inputs on which credit has been taken which was used in the manufacture of exempted final products for the whole period. Mr. Sridharan would take us through the order passed by the Tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to Mr. Sridharan, in the present case, it is the intermediate product. The intermediate product is yarn of wool, which is used in manufacture of woollen shawl. Therefore, whether in the price of the woollen shawl the component is included and if included to such an extent as would cover the cost plus profit, then, possibly, such a finding could have been rendered. However, when apart from the Chartered Accountant's certificate, there were materials on record to support the finding of the Appellate Authority, then, the Tribunal should have given an opportunity to the assessee to rely upon the same. Mr. Sridharan therefore, submits that the adjudication by the Tribunal is unsatisfactory and incomplete. 5. Mr. Jetly appearing for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vely rejected by the Assistant Commissioner. Upon noticing the admitted factual position, including the Notification, the Commissioner referred to the grounds and the arguments before him. As regards the Commissioner's findings and which are rendered against the assessee, there is no dispute, because no cross appeals were filed. 7. Therefore, para 8 of the Commissioner's (Appeals) order need not be referred and in further details. From para 9 onwards, the arguments in relation to the aforenoted two questions have been considered. Upon consideration, the Commissioner concluded that the duty is paid on intermediate product used in the manufacture of exempted final products. The concept of unjust enrichment would be applicable. However....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....We are of the view that the Tribunal in paras 5.1 and 5.2 of the impugned order was required to refer to all the materials before the Commissioner and in complete details. Even if the appeals were to be allowed, the Commissioner's findings should have been dealt with extensively to arrive at a conclusion as to whether they can be said to be perverse or vitiated by error of law apparent on the face of the record. We do not find that in relation to the first aspect, namely whether credit was reversed even at the time of filing of refund claim in August, 2002, there was no issue raised and seriously before the Tribunal. Even if the record submitted by the assessee before the Adjudicating Authority revealed that the assessee claimed that they h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not discharged the statutory obligation cast on it of providing that incidence of duty paid on the yarn was not passed on to buyers of the final products? 12. In the light of the above referred material, namely the arguments of both sides, the findings of the Commissioner and the documents referred by him, we are of the opinion that keeping this appeal pending in this Court would serve no useful purpose. The Tribunal having not dealt with the matter satisfactorily and while rendering the conclusions against the assessee, having failed to note the Commissioner's findings that we are of the view that the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. In order to give complete opportunity to both sides and to rely on the materi....