TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 819
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eved against the impugned order the Appellant has filed this appeal. When the matter was called today, none appeared for the Appellant. However, the Appellant has submitted a letter dated 11th August 2022 requesting to decide the appeal on the basis of material evidence available on record. Accordingly, the Appeal is taken up for decision with the help of the Learned AR. 2. The Learned AR referred Para 10.1 of the impugned Order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), wherein he has categorically mentioned that the Appellant has not produced any evidence before the Central Excise authority to substantiate their claim that the incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. Accordingly, he prays that the appeal is required to be re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. Accordingly, the Appellant was asked to provide evidence that 'unjust enrichment' is not applicable in this case. However, the Appellant could not produce any evidence to substantiate their claim. 6. I find that the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals) has given a detailed findings at Para 10.1 of the impugned order regarding the applicability of 'unjust enrichment' in this case, which is reproduced below:- 10.1 On plain reading of the above, I find that the refund application is to be accompanied by the documents evidencing payment of excise duty by the assessee and evidence showing that the incidence of duty has been passed on to the customers and if it is found that the whole or any part of duty paid by the applicant is refund....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herein the Hon'ble Tribunal has hold that the appellant has failed to substantiate their claim of compliance of mandatory condition of unjust enrichment by not providing documentary evidence confirming the non-inclusion of impugned duty in the final product Margo Soap where the captive consumption of the impugned goods has been admitted. On perusal of the documents submitted with grounds of appeal, I find that the appellant has not placed before me any documentary evidence like, Financial account statement along with Chartered Accountant's certificate evidencing that the excess duty element has not been passed on by the way of non-including the same in the cost of production of final product. Therefore, in absence of any cogent evidence, I ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cannot merely act upon the certificate. If such an interpretation is given, then there is no need for authorities to decide the issue of refund. In other words, the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant would prevail over the consideration of the issues before the authorities. Such a situation has not been contemplated under the Act. Further, Section 27 mandates on the importer to produce such documents or other evidence while seeking refund to establish that the amount of duty in relation to which such refund is claimed, has not been passed on by him to any other person. 9. Therefore, considering the above said provisions and applying the same to the facts on hand, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has committed an error....