IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CEA NO. 170 OF 2006 DATE OF DECISION: 20.03.2007 Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate, Ludhiana. …Appellant Versus M/s Varinder Agro Chemical Ltd. …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant-revenue. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral) The revenue has approached this Court by filing this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against the order dated 1.3.2006, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The categorical findings as recorded by the Deputy Commissioner as well as by the Commissioner have been affirmed by the Tribunal, which were to the effect that the assessee did not charge the amount of duty from the buyer and subsequently sought to return the same to him through credit notes. The findings further are that the higher amounts which were sought as C.E.A. No. 170 of 2006 refund were never paid by the buyer. On the basis of the aforementioned findings, the judgments laying down the principles of unjust enrichment have not been applied. We have heard learned counsel and find that no exception has been provided to reopen the issue. The pure findings of facts have been recorded which shows that instance of tax has never been passed on to the buyer which may necessitate to invoke the principles of unjust enrichment. There is no merit in the appeal. Dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJESH BINDAL) March 20, 2007 JUDGE Pkapoor 2