2005 (7) TMI 428 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to benefit of High Court's judgment
2. Time-barred refund claim
3. Unjust enrichment bar

Entitlement to benefit of High Court's judgment:
The case involved the purchase of "sugantha supari" by the respondents from manufacturers who paid duty under protest. The respondents sought a refund based on a High Court judgment excluding such supari from excise duty. The original authority rejected the claim, stating the respondents were not part of the Writ Petitions. The Commissioner (Appeals) held the benefit applied to the respondents. The Tribunal found the claim time-barred under Section 11B, emphasizing the High Court's judgment did not override statutory limitations. Thus, the respondents were not entitled to the benefit of the judgment.

Time-barred refund claim:
The Tribunal considered the claim filed on 21-12-99 for duty paid during 1994-95. The Commissioner (Appeals) linked the limitation period to the High Court's judgment date, but the Tribunal disagreed. It held the claim was time-barred under Section 11B, irrespective of the judgment's applicability. The Tribunal emphasized that statutory limitations must be adhered to, dismissing the claim as untimely.

Unjust enrichment bar:
The Tribunal did not delve into the unjust enrichment issue as the time-barred claim was the decisive factor. The lower appellate authority's decision to sanction a cash refund was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with statutory limitations under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, even in cases involving judicial judgments.