Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2016-08-29 allowed

Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras vs Addison & Co. Ltd

Bench: 3 — L. Nageswara Rao

In Brief

The Supreme Court examined multiple appeals concerning excise duty refunds under the Central Excise Act, 1944. A key issue was whether manufacturers are entitled to claim refunds for excess duty paid when such duty was passed on to buyers. The Court held that refunds can only be granted to the person who ultimately bore the duty burden. Even though trade discounts were admissible deductions, a manufacturer who initially passed on the duty incidence to buyers at clearance cannot subsequently claim refund through post-clearance credit notes without proving the downstream recipients did not further pass on the duty. The Court allowed appeals from revenue authorities and set aside High Court judgments that favored manufacturers, emphasizing that allowing such refunds would constitute unjust enrichment and violate statutory refund provisions designed to benefit actual duty bearers.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Excise Duty Refund Claims Unjust Enrichment Consumer Welfare Fund Trade Discounts Statutory Interpretation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login