Back
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
Mrs. K.K. Usha, C.N.B. Nair, P.G. CHACKO, JJ.
Grasim Inds. (Chemical Divn.) -Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal -Respondent
Final Order No. 131/2003-B Appeal No. E/943/2002-C, 131 of 2003, 943 of 2002
Decided On : 17-02-2003
Act Referred
K.K. Anand,M. Chandrashekhran
Per Justice K.K. Usha : In this appeal at the instance of the assessee challenging is against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal dt. 31.12.2001.
2. The appellants have made a claim for refund of the duty paid by him. The claim was rejected on the ground that it was hit by the principles of unjust enrichment. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the adjudicating authority as well as the appellate authority, the assessee has filed the present appeal.
3. The appellant's contention that the provisions contained under Section 11B are not applicable in their case as they had already issued credit note to the buyer and as such they had borne the duty themselves was not accepted by the authorities below relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE Vs. Addision
4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the above decision of the Tribunal has been reversed by the Madras High Court in Addison
5. On the other hand it is pointed out on the behalf of the Revenue that the issue is covered by the decision of this tribunal in Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. Vs. CCE reported in 1994 (71) ELT 989 which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
6. Today we have considered in detail an identical issue in Appeal No. E/1626/01-NB filed by M/s. S. Kumar's Ltd. After detailed consideration of similar contentions, we have held that since the view taken by the Tribunal in Sangam Processors is affirmed by the Supreme Court while dismissing Civil Appeal 1994 (70) ELT A182, decision of this Tribunal in Thermon Heat Tracers Ltd. is not good law.
7. In the result, contentions raised in this appeal by the assessee fail and the appeal stands dismissed.
