2008 (2) TMI 774 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
The appeal involves the rejection of a claim for refund of duty for the year 1994, raising the question of unjust enrichment under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act.

Unjust Enrichment Issue:
The appeal pertains to the rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 37,793 for the year 1994, arising from the finalization of provisional assessment. The key issue is whether the refund claim is impacted by the doctrine of unjust enrichment under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The Central Excise Rules, 1944, specifically exempted refunds from finalization of provisional assessment from the purview of Section 11B. A subsequent amendment in 1999 introduced a proviso requiring refunds to be made in accordance with Section 11B. However, this amendment did not have a retrospective effect. Citing the decision in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai v. T.V.S. Suzuki Ltd., it was concluded that the refund claim in question is not affected by Section 11B. Consequently, the appeal was allowed after due consideration of submissions from both parties.

Decision:
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, allowed the appeal regarding the rejection of a refund claim for duty for the year 1994, based on the finding that the claim was not impacted by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The decision was made after considering the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Rules and the non-retrospective nature of the amendment introduced in 1999.