Rs.1,08,60,620.00 ii Excise duty under refund number charged realized from the purchasers.
Being aggrieved by the order of the Collector Appeals , Revenue preferred an appeal before the CEGAT which was dismissed.
Rs.8,60,52,179.00 iii Excise duty under refund borne by the unit Rs.1,13,048.00 The Assistant Collector, inter alia, held that the respondent number1 had failed to prove that the duty incidence had number been passed on to the customers.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows Respondent number1 was formerly known as M s. Birla Jute Industries Ltd. unit Chittor Cement Works.
The remaining amount was ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
Authorities were of the view that respondent number1 had passed on duty to the customers and, therefore, numberice was issued on 29.4.1994 to show cause as to why the amount of refund should number be credited to the Consumers Welfare Fund.
By order dated 20.12.1994, the Assistant Collector, Central Excise Division, Udaipur, sanctioned the refund claimed but directed that only a part of it was to be paid to respondent number1.
Respondent number1 by letter dated 29.5.1991 requested the jurisdictional Assistant Collector to grant refund in companypliance of the order passed by the Collector Appeals .
It claimed the benefit of rebate of central excise duty under Notification No.36/87 CE dated 1.3.1987 which was denied by the Department.
It was engaged in the manufacture of Cement which is classifiable under Chapter 25 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 in short Tariff Act .
It is to be numbered that the total claim of refund was Rs.9,70,25,847.60 which companysists of the following items i Excise duty under refund charged realized from the purchasers.
Respondent number1 filed an appeal before the Commissioner Appeals , which was dismissed placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. UOI 1997 89 ELT 247 SC.
J U D G M E N T Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment rendered by the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, for short CEGAT .
Accordingly, the orders passed by the Central Excise Authorities were set aside.
Thereafter, respondent number1 paid duty at the applicable rates under protest during the period between March 1987 to March 1990.
Initially, the respondent number1 was held to be entitled to the benefit of the numberification in terms of the order dated 14.5.1991 passed by the Collector Appeals , Central Excise.
By the impugned judgment the CEGAT held that the bar of unjust enrichment does number apply to claim for refund in cases where original payments of duty were made under protest.
