2017 (6) TMI 366

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gh The brief facts of the case are that the appellants filed refund claim of Rs. 4,61,482/- under Section 173S of the Central Excise Rules 1944 on the ground that after having supplied the berths to various organs of the Railway as well as various state transport authorities, their invoice values were reduced by them after deducting the amount on account of liquidated damages. Thus, the receipt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submits that the issue is covered in favour of the appellants by the above judgement. However, the refund claim needs to be examined for unjust enrichment. In this regard, he relied on the judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Madras vs. Addison & Co.Ltd.-2016 (339) ELT 177 (SC). 4. Heard the parties and examined the records. 5. I find that the issue in whether the amoun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....decisions adverted to above were either on the basis of provisions of Section 4 prior to its amendment by Finance Act, 2000 or without analysis of provisions of the amended Section 4 and the distinct concepts of penalty and liquidated damages , pointed out in United Telecom Ltd. 18. The decision in Electron Energy Equipments Ltd. (supra), which is in conflict with the decision in United T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntractually stipulated for delayed supply would be the transaction value and this value would be the value relevant for levy of duty. 20. On the aforesaid analysis, we answer the reference by holding that wherever the assessee, as per the terms of the contract and on account of delay in delivery of manufactured goods is liable to pay a lesser amount than the generically agreed price as a ....