TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (3) TMI 150
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntral excise duty of Rs. 1,37,13,435/- on these diamond kits under protest. Following the order of the Tribunal in August 1999 holding that such packing of chain and connecting links with bought out sprocket did not involve an exigible process of manufacture, TIDC claimed refund of the excise duty paid by them on the kits. Before the original authority, the assessee produced documentary evidence substantiating payment of impugned amount of duty and that the same had not been recovered from the buyers of the kits. A certificate from Chartered Accountants to the effect that the refund amount claimed had not been collected from the customers of TIDC and that the amount of Rs. 1,37,13,435/- had been shown under the heading 'Loans and Advances' ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s depots. The Commissioner (Appeals) had not given a reasoned finding as to how the above amount represented duty collected. (ii) Refund of Rs. 3,55,800/- With relevant documents the appellants had established that the entire excise duty on diamond kits was kept as a deposit in their books of accounts. The certificate of the Chartered Accountant showed that this amount had not been recovered by TIDC. The claim for refund of this amount had been disallowed on a wrong ground that the same related to unsold stock. (iii) Refund of Rs. 21,329/- The above amount pertained to 18 invoices. The invoices had carried endorsement of duty paid by TIDC on chains (input of kit) at the time of their clearance to kit unit. 3. During hearing t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. The stock transferred goods carried the endorsement 'excise duty paid under protest not collectable/recoverable from customers'. He found on verification of the assessee's sale invoices that it had not realized an amount of Rs. 1,25,05,659/- paid to the Department under protest. He also relied on the certificate produced by the Chartered Accountant to the above effect as well as the certification that the said amount was accounted as 'loans and advances' under the head 'current assets' as on 31-8-1999 in the assessee's records. Accordingly he allowed refund of Rs. 1,25,05,659/- by cheque. An amount of Rs. 3,55,800/-pertained to unsold stock. So claim for this amount was denied. Rs. 21,329/- being total of the amounts shown as excise duty....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant's claim. As regards Rs. 12,07,776/, we find that TIDC had explained with their pricelist and stock transfer notes, that the sale price represented the value on which they had paid the excise duty under protest and the items of expenditure such as freight and discount. This freight was for transport from depots to dealers and discount allowed; both were not includible in the value for assessment of duty. The Assistant Commissioner observed that TIDC paid excise duty at the applicable rate of 16% adv and did not recover the same from their buyers. In reply to the Show Cause Notice proposing to deny refund on the ground of unjust enrichment of the appellants, the appellants had explained its sale price citing particulars relatin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duty paid on the inputs of kits, does not disentitle appellants to refund of the amount of duty admittedly paid by TIDC and not collected from customers. 7. We find that the appellant withdrew claim for refund of Rs. 3,55,800/- on the ground that major part of it was released by the department since. The appeal as modified does not cover this amount. 8. The appeal for grant of refund of Rs. 12,07,776/- and Rs. 21,329/- deposited in the CWF as per the impugned order along with admissible interest u/s 11BB of the Act is allowed. Appeal No. E/1159/2001 9. In this appeal TIDC has claimed interest of an amount of 1620451/- for the delay in sanctioning refund of Rs. 1,21,28,530/- beyond the period of three months from 4-10-1999 when t....