TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 174
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....als is common, these are being disposed of through this common order. The details of the appeals are as under: SI No. Appeal No. Order- in- Appeal No & date Amounts Involved (Rs.) 1 E/2977/2011 123/2011 dt. 25.08.2011 1,71,16,559/- 2 E/21248/2014 MYS- EXCUS- 000- DIVII- APP- HAB- 005- 2014 Dt.18.01.2014 87,58,843/- 3 E/21250/2014 MYS- EXCUS- 000- DIVII- APP- HAB- 006- 2014 Dt.18.01.2014 2,76,50,526/- 4 E/21252/2014 MYS- EXCUS- 000- DIVII- APP- HAB- 010- 2014 Dt.22.01.2014 35,74,360/- 2,66,361/- 5 E/21304/2014 MYS- EXCUS- 000- DIVII- APP- HAB- 053- 2014 Dt.27.01.2014 1,10,86,677/- 8,67,677/- 6 E/22842/2014 MYS- EXCUS- 000- DIV2- APP- HAB- 053- 2014 Dt.15.05.2014 4,24,488/- 7 E/22843/2014 MYS- EXCUS- 000-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grant of refund of excess duty paid, the same needs to be subjected to test of unjust enrichment which is built into Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. He specifically referred to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Addison and Company - 2016-TIOL-146-SC-LB wherein the Apex Court has observed that refund of excess duty paid can be allowed only in cases where the burden of duty has not been passed on to any other person who includes the ultimate customer as well. He accordingly submitted that the impugned orders may be set aside for Such verification. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent justified the impugned order. He submitted that in the case of provisional assessment/ the test of unjust enrichment is not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision in CESTAT, Delhi in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. CCE reported in 2015-TIOL-2427CESTAT-DEL. In this decision, it has been held that adjustments at the time of finalization of provisional assessments would be permissible without putting the excess duty paid to the test of unjust enrichment. He also submitted that the Bangalore Bench of CESTAT has already decided an identical issue in their own case for a different period vide Final Order E/50163/2018-EX (DB) decision, the benefit of adjustment stands extended in their favour of the respondent- assessee by following the decision in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. (supra). 7. We have heard both sides and gone through the records in detail. We find that the decision cited by the ....