9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Refund denial based on Chartered Accountant's Certificate lacking documentary evidence and unjust enrichment burden. Expert opinion validity and waiver of pre-deposit. Analysis: The judgment addressed the issue of refund denial based on a Chartered Accountant's Certificate lacking documentary evidence to prove non-passing of duty burden. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) set aside the refund order due to the lack of supporting evidence. The appellants argued that the denial solely based on lack of documentary evidence was unjustified, emphasizing the long-pending nature of the issue. The Tribunal noted that the Chartered Accountant's Certificate, based on the documents provided, should be considered expert opinion and not easily dismissed. It was emphasized that an expert opinion should prevail unless contradicted by another expert opinion. The Tribunal decided to allow the application, granting a full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery until the appeal's disposal. The applicants were required to maintain the bank guarantee and bond as per the High Court's order during the appeal's final hearing. The judgment delved into the aspect of unjust enrichment burden and the validity of expert opinions in the context of refund denial. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of considering expert opinions, especially when not contradicted by another expert opinion. The decision to grant a full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery was made to ensure fairness and allow for a detailed examination of the issues involved in the appeal. The requirement for the applicants to uphold the bank guarantee and bond during the appeal process added a layer of assurance pending the final hearing. The judgment aimed to balance the interests of the parties involved while upholding the principles of justice and expert opinion validity in such matters.
|
