2015 (6) TMI 1062

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ar, DR for the Respondent ORDER Per S K Mohanty Rejection of refund claim on the ground of unjust enrichment is the subject matter of present dispute. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant entered into the Contract Manufacture Agreement with the principal manufacturer M/s Nestle India Ltd., by which goods manufactured by the appellant were to be sent directly to the distributio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vide the impugned order dated 22/05/2014 has upheld rejection of the refund application by the original authority. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Sh. B. L. Narsimhan, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that the distribution centers of the principal manufacturer charged correct price from the retailers ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... sale of goods by the appellant to principal manufacturer and the appellant had not received the excess excise duty paid inadvertently. To support his stand that the doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable to the fact of the present case, the Ld. Advocate has relied on the following decisions rendered by the Judicial forums:- (a) CCE, Bangalore-II vs. Mysore Electrical Industries Ltd., 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Rs. 65 per sachet only and no excess Central Excise duty was recovered from the final customers. This is evident from the invoices enclosed to the appeal paper book. Furthermore, I find that the appellants have also submitted along with the refund claim, a detailed chart showing comparison of invoices raised by the Appellants and distribution centers of the Principal Manufacture. The Chart cle....