2016 (12) TMI 1368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER The appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: 277/2004 MCH dated 16/06/2004 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai - I whereby Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the order-in-original No.  S/6-Gr.VA-17/2001 R Gr.VA-246/2001 CRARS dated 10/12/2002, rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. 2.  The brief fact....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ence of duty has not been passed on to any other person.  The adjudicating authority while rejecting the claim taken the support of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Solar Pesticides Pvt. Ltd. [2000 (116) ELT 401 (SC)].  Being aggrieved by the order-in-original the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the appeal upholding the order-in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ven the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Solar Pesticides (supra) was also considered.  He submits that as per these judgments if the price of the final product of the assessee is matching with the price of the other sellers in the market, the duty element cannot be said to have been passed on to the customers. Facts of the present case is also identical to the said judgment.&nbs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se the price of the final product is similar to the price of the other suppliers/manufacturers, the appellant cannot take a stand that principles of unjust enrichment is not applicable.  He submits that as per the provisions of Section 27 the burden is on the assessee to prove that incidence of duty for which refund is sought for, has not been passed on to any other person. In the present cas....