Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M/S.Nilachal Ispat Nigam Ld on 2 May, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Appeal No. E/123/08
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.51/B-I/2007 dated 06.12.2007 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Bhubaneswar.)
Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, BBSR-I
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
M/s.Nilachal Ispat Nigam Ld.
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Shri K.Choudhary, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue NONE for the Respondent CORAM:
Honble Shri P.K.Choudhary, Member(Judicial) Date of Hearing/Decision :- 02.05.2017 ORDER NO.FO/A/75812/2017 Per Shri P.K.Choudhary.
Heard the ld.A.R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent.
2. Ld.A.R. for the Revenue submitted that the Order-in-Appeal dated 06.12.2007 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) appears to be not correct and proper, as he has allowed the appeal with consequential relief, ignoring the findings of the Adjudicating Authority to the effect that there was no excess payment by the respondent. The respondent had failed to prove that the burden of duty in respect of which the refund was claimed, had not been passed on to any other person, and lower appellate authority has ignored the consequential issue of unjust enrichment.
3. Heard the ld.AR for the Revenue and perused the appeal records.
4. I find that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has allowed the appeal of the appellant duly ignoring the points raised by the Revenue. In these circumstances the case is remanded to the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) to decide the issues taken by the Revenue in their grounds of appeal.
5. In view of the above discussions, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside.
6. The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed by way of remand.
(Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court.)
SD/
(P.K.CHOUDHARY) MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
sm
2
Appeal No. E/123/08