GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have made a prayer for decision on merits. Accordingly, I heard Shri R.K. Chandan, Ld. JDR for the revenue and have gone through the impugned order passed by the authorities below. The only issue involved in the present case is also to whether the refund claimed by the appellants and sanctioned by the original adjudicating authority but credited to consumer welfare fund, is hit by the provisions of unjust enrichment or not. The appellants have taken a stand that inasmuch as the price of the final products cleared by them remained the same through out the price of rhe final products cleared by them remained the same through out the period in question, it cannot be held that the duty element has been recovered by then from their customers. There is no other evidence produced by the appellants on record in support of their contention that the said duty was not recovered by them from their buyers.

(2.) It is seen that in the case of JCT Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh -II it was held that the mere fact that the price remained constant through out the relevant period by itself does not lead to the inevitable conclusion that the assessee had not passed on duty burden to their buyers.

(3.) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the recent Judgment in the case of CCE, Mumbai -JI v. Allied Photographies India Ltd. 2004 (166) ELT (SC) : 2004 (112) ECR 506 (SC) has also observed that uniformity in the price cannot be made the basis for arriving at a conclusion of non passing of incidence of duty to the buyers. For better appreciation, I reproduce para 18 of the order (supra).