2007 (11) TMI 472 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. P-I/344/2006 dated 23-11-2006.

Issue 1: Unjust Enrichment in Refund Cases

The appeal was taken up in the absence of the respondent. The department argued that the question of unjust enrichment arises in refund cases. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the respondent, stating that the amount deposited during the investigation was in the nature of a pre-deposit and not payment of duty. The Commissioner held that as long as there is no unjust enrichment, the appellants are eligible for a refund. Citing relevant case laws, it was concluded that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply to such deposits. The excess amount deposited during the investigation, which was more than the duty liability determined later, should be refunded to the appellants instead of being credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.

Decision:

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order, stating that the law as laid down by higher judicial forums was correctly followed. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected.