Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara on 17 March, 2016
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad ^^^ Appeal No. : E/1181/2008-DB [Arising out of OIA-COMMR-A-/72/VDR-I/2008 Dated 15/05/2008 Passed by Commissioners of Central Exise, Customs and Service Tax-VADODARA-I] Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. : Appellant(s) Vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara : Respondent (s)
Represented by :
Appellant(s) : Shri Willingdon Christian (Advocate) Respondent (s): Shri L. Patra (Authorized Representative) For approval and signature :
Dr. D.M. Misra, Honble Member (Judicial) Mr. P.M. Saleem, Honble Member (Technical) 1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes CORAM :
Dr. D.M. Misra, Honble Member (Judicial) Mr. P.M. Saleem, Honble Member (Technical) Date of Hearing / Decision : 17/03/2016 ORDER No. A/10202 / 2016 Dated: 17/03/2016 Per : Dr. D.M. Misra;
This is an appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No. Comm.(A)/72/BDR-I/2008 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Appeals (Vadodara).
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellant had claimed refund of Rs.68,93,384/- on 11/07/2006 on the ground that they had paid duty and cleared LSHS to M/s National Fertilizers (NFL) on payment of duty, when the said goods were exempted from duty under notification no. 6/2002-CE dated 01/03/2002. After protracted litigation, the said refund claim was held to be admissible by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), but subject to verification of the fact that the incidence of duty had not been passed on to their customer. On examination/Scrutiny of the evidence, the Adjudicating Authority decided the issue against the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn rejected their appeal. Hence, the present appeal.
3. The Ld. Advocated for the appellant submits that the appellant has produced evidences in the form of Chartered Accountants certificate and respective invoices before the Authorities in support of their claim that the incidence of duty had not been passed on to another concern i.e. M/s National Fertilizers Ltd., who had utilized the LSHS as feed stock. However, certain documents like Ledgers, credit notes, etc. issued to regularize the books of accounts, could not be produced before the Authorities as these documents were not available with them at the time of hearing. He submits that they are now in possession of all these documents and other corroborative evidences by which it can be established that the incidence of duty had not been passed on to their customer. He prays that the matter may be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for consideration of these evidences.
4. Ld. Authorized Representative for the Revenue submits that since the evidences were not placed earlier before the Authority, therefore, the same could not be considered by the Authority below. He has no objection in remanding the case to the original Authority.
5. Heard both sides and perused the records, we find that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) after scrutiny of the evidences produced before him observed that the appellant could not establish that the incidence of duty was not passed on to their customer. Accordingly, he has not allowed their claims. Now, the appellant contends that all corroborative evidences are in their possession by which it can be established that the incidence of duty has not been passed on to the customers. We are of the opinion that the appellant be given a fair chance to place these evidences in support of their claim before the department. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remand the case to the original Adjudicating Authority for examination of all evidences afresh. Needless to mention a reasonable opportunity of hearing be granted to the Appellant. Appeal is allowed of way of remand.
(Operative part of the Order Pronounced in open Court)
(P.M.Saleem) (D.M. Misra)
Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)
Abhishek
2