Carrier Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Chandigarh)
CESTAT Chandigarh held that once there is a sufficient evidence to prove that the excess duty paid by the assessee has not been passed on to the ultimate buyer, the doctrine of bar of unjust enrichment will not be applicable.
Facts- The appellant are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. Air Conditioners, Chillers and parts thereof. They were paying central excise duty on their products, cleared to their depots on a stock transfer basis u/s. 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. They filed refund claims for Rs. 7,01,241/- and 6,11,387/-.
The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned both the refunds in favour of the appellant and allowed re-credit of these amounts in the cenvat credit account of the appellant.
Department filed appeals against the said order before Commissioner (A) and the same was allowed. Accordingly, appellant filed appeal before Tribunal. Tribunal reduced the litigation to a narrow compass of examining evidence to test the unjust enrichment only. Again the matter travelled back.
Conclusion- We find that once it is established that the goods were sold from the depot to the customers at a lower price then the higher duty has not been collected by the appellant and hence there is no unjust enrichment.
We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any credence to the certificates issued by the chartered accountant wherein the chartered accountant has stated that they have verified the entire books of accounts which reveal that the excess duty at the time of clearance, which was paid has not been passed on to the customers.
The original authority while granting the refund has verified all the documents as recorded by them in the order-in original granting the refund and in the absence of any contrary evidence, the department cannot possibly say that the bar of unjust enrichment has not been passed by the appellant.
Held that once there is a sufficient evidence to prove that the excess duty paid by the assessee has not been passed on to the ultimate buyer, the doctrine of bar of unjust enrichment will not be applicable.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHANDIGARH ORDER
These two appeals are directed against the impugned order dated 31.08.2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise-Delhi-III whereby both the appeals of the appellant were dismissed by passing the common impugned order. Since the issue involved in both the appeals is identical and the impugned order is common, therefore, we take up both the appeals together for the purpose of discussion and disposal. The details of both the appeals are given herein below in tabular form:-
