KHETALAL RATANSI PATEL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMMON issue is involved, therefore the appeals are being taken up together. The appellants filed these appeals against the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication orders rejecting the refund claim filed by the appellants.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the appellants made import of teak round logs and paid appropriate duty including 4% special additional duty of customs. Subsequently the appellants sold the goods to different buyers on payment of appropriate VAT. Thereafter the appellant filed a refund claim in view of the provisions of Notification No. , dated 14 -9 -2007. The adjudicating authority allowed the refund claim, however credited the amounts to the Consumer Welfare Fund on the ground that the appellant failed to show that burden of duty has not been passed on. The adjudication is upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).

(3.) THE Revenue relied upon the findings of the lower authority and submitted that the appellant failed to show that burden of duty has not been passed on hence the refund claim was rightly rejected.