NAHAR INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal preferred by the appellants against the impugned order -in -appeal dismissing their claim for refund of the duty, the issue relates to the applicability of doctrine of unjust enrichment. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Acrylic/Cotton Yarn. They lodged four refund claims of different amounts, in all of Rs. 10,78,056/ - on the ground that they had borne the burden of excess duty in respect of the clearance of goods Acrylic/Cotton Yarn from their factory to Depot on stock transfer basis which were subsequently sold at lower price from Ludhiana Depot. The adjudicating authority dismissed these claims through common order -in -original by applying the principle of unjust enrichment. That order had been affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

(2.) None had come present on behalf of the appellants. No request for adjournment has also been received. Therefore, we proceed to decide the matter after hearing the learned SDR. We have gone through the records and in our view, the impugned order deserves to be maintained.

(3.) The perusal of the record shows that the refund claims of the appellants pertain to the period July, 2000 to October, 2000. These have been filed on the ground that they paid excess duty on the excisable goods at the time of clearances of goods from the factory on stock transfer basis to the depot. When they submitted their claims, they also filed documents indicating their sale policy and marketing pattern, besides 52A invoices. The prices indicated in the invoices issued by the depot to the dealers/buyers were inclusive of the duty and other taxes. They also filed declaration under Sub -rule 3(a) of Rule 3C of the Rules wherein they admitted that their pricing pattern was inclusive of all taxes and duties and that they collected the excess duty from their buyers which they paid to the department. This fact also stands proved from Clause III(c)(xv) of the declaration.