2016 (12) TMI 986

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dent ORDER Appellant is engaged in the sale of refurbished photocopier machines. Pursuant to investigation by the DGCEI, show cause notice dt. 3.5.2006 was issued inter alia proposing demand of Rs. 46,94,591/- in respect of photo copiers cleared without payment of Central Excise duty. Appellant approached the Settlement Commission who settled the total liability at Rs. 38,95,357/- vide Order No.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... net amount of Rs. 12,93,765/- was payable to them as refund. Lower authority after considering the representation and hearing the appeal in person passed an OIO dt. 31.8.2010 rejecting the refund claim. Appeal by appellant against this order was rejected by Commissioner (Appeals). The relevant portion of the Commissioner (Appeals) order is reproduced below :- "9. However, the representations as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st as calculated by the Respondent as ordered vide Settlement Commission Order. They could have filed separate refund claim under Section 11B of the CEA, 1944 for proper reasons along with necessary documents evidencing their excess payment and also to prove that the incidence of such duty has not been passed on by them to their Customers/buyers. The unjust enrichment onus had lied upon them under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... been held in this appeal for more than a year from 17.4.2015. The appellant had asked for certain documents which the department was directed to provide. Appellant still claims that they have not received the required documents whereas the department pointed out that they have handed over the soft copy of the document to their authorized signatory. In any case, I find that the issue relates to ca....