STEEL STRIPS LIMITED Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides on the limited issue of whether unjust enrichment is involved or not in as much as the challenge was restricted to the said issue.

(2.) THE relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellant was manufacturing cold rolled strips. They had claimed refund relating to the period 01.04.1992 to 31.03.1998 on the ground that no duty was payable on the said cold rolled strips. The matter went up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In pursuance of the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 27.04.2003, first the issue relating to unjust enrichment of the refund claim preferred by them has to be considered and in the event of their crossing the bar of unjust enrichment, the matter should be considered on merits as well by the Tribunal. The original authority considered the aspect of unjust enrichment and held that the appellant has passed on the burden of duty to the consumers and the same has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).

(3.) LEARNED Joint CDR Shri B.K. Singh relying on the decisions in the cases of India Agencies v. CCE, Chennai reported in : 2007 (212) ELT 507 (Tri. Chennai), Skycell Communications Ltd., v. CCE, Chennai reported in, 2007 (216) ELT 702 (Tri. Chennai), A.K. Enterprise v. CC (Port), Kolkata reported in, 2006 (199) ELT 67 (Tri. Kolkata), JCT Limited v. CCE reported in : 2006 (202) ELT 773 (P&H) and in the case of CCE, Mumbai -IV v. Abu Jani Sandeep Khosla reported in, 2006 (206) ELT 599 (Tri. Mumbai) submits that once the duty amounts are indicated in the statutory documents namely the gate passes/invoices, it is not merely the presumption that the duty burden has been passed on by the assessee to the consumers but it is an evidence that the said amount has been passed on to the consumers. Under these circumstances, the burden to prove that the duty has not been passed on to the consumers is squarely on the appellant and they have not proved that the duty incidence has not been passed on to the consumers. Therefore, he submits that the orders of the lower authorities are legally sustainable.