2010 (11) TMI 1014 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues involved: Refund claim of duty paid on imported goods for manufacturing goods exported, unjust enrichment.

The appellant, a manufacturer exporter, sought a refund claim for duty paid on imported goods used in manufacturing exported goods. The lower authorities sanctioned the claim but denied it due to unjust enrichment. The appellant argued they paid duty as they lacked permission for duty-free import for export, and as they had no domestic sales, they were entitled to the refund since there is no duty on exports. The appellant's consultant contended that the bar of unjust enrichment did not apply in this case.

The appellant claimed they exported goods manufactured from the imported goods on which duty was paid. The appellant's consultant argued that since duty was paid on the raw material used for manufacturing exported goods, they should be entitled to the refund. The appellant's position was that they met the criteria for refund and unjust enrichment should not be a barrier.

The Departmental Representative (DR) contended that the appellant failed to prove that the exported goods were manufactured from the duty-paid imported goods. The DR argued that unjust enrichment applied in this case, and the appellant did not provide sufficient evidence to support their claim. The DR supported the lower authorities' decision to deny the refund claim.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted that if the appellant could demonstrate that the exported goods were indeed manufactured from the duty-paid imported goods, they would be entitled to the refund claim. The Tribunal decided to set aside the lower authorities' decision and allowed the appeal by way of remand. The adjudicating authority was directed to examine the records, provide a reasonable opportunity for the appellant to present their case, and ensure the appellant satisfied the authority regarding their claim.