2005 (12) TMI 174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2003 by which refund amount of Rs. 4,99,461/- has been rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment and the authority has been directed that the refund amount was to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. The Bills of Entry were assessed with higher value and the higher quantum of duty was demanded. This became the subject matter to decide and the matter had reached before the Commissioner (Appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he ground that the balance sheet does not show the split up of the total quantum of duty of Rs. 54,90,728/- received by the appellants in the above stated heading. I have heard both the sides in the matter. 2. The learned Counsel relies on large number of judgments and submits that the issue is covered by the following judgments:- (i)      Toyota Kirloskar Motor Ltd.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 4. On a careful consideration of the matter, I notice that the Chartered Accountant has put the entire amount due to the company in a specific heading and has shown split up in the Book of Accounts. This was not the question to be decided in the matter. The short question to be decided in the matter is as to whether the refund was due to them in terms of the Commissioner's (Appeals) order No....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ountant's certificate. This certificate is not disputed by the Revenue. In these circumstances, the refund became due to the assessee. The assessee has discharged their burden of excess amount not passed on to the customers. In the cited judgments, the ratio is the same lines. This Bench in the case of Toyota Kirloskar Motor Ltd. (supra) while referring to other judgments has clearly held that whe....