2011 (11) TMI 250 - AT - Customs

Applicability of unjust enrichment on refund of fine and penalty - Held that - The Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear cut findings that the applicant has passed the burden of unjust enrichment by producing their balance sheets and CA certificate and also provided that in the case of refund of fine and penalty unjust enrichment is not applicable. See United Spirits Ltd vs The Commissioner of Customs(Import) Mumbai (2009 - TMI - 34006 - Bombay High Court). Since Revenue has not challenged the part of the order wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the applicant has passed burden of unjust enrichment. Therefore there is no merit in the Revenue s appeal the same is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Application of principles of unjust enrichment in refunding fine and penalty.

Analysis:
The Revenue filed an appeal challenging the observation made by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the application of unjust enrichment principles in refunding fine and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) based their decision on the United Spirits case and noted that unjust enrichment does not apply in such cases. The Revenue argued that since there is no specific provision in the law for refunding fine and penalty where unjust enrichment is applicable, the decision cannot be relied upon. The Tribunal heard the arguments and examined the records. They found that the appeal could be disposed of at that stage. After dismissing the stay application of the department, the Tribunal proceeded with the final disposal of the appeal.

The Tribunal reviewed the relevant paragraph of the impugned order where the Commissioner (Appeals) had concluded that the applicant had demonstrated passing the burden of unjust enrichment through their balance sheets and CA certificate. The Commissioner (Appeals) also referenced the United Spirits case to support the view that unjust enrichment does not apply to refunding fine and penalty. Since the Revenue did not challenge the part of the order affirming the passing of the burden of unjust enrichment by the applicant, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

In summary, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision that unjust enrichment principles do not apply to the refund of fine and penalty, as supported by the United Spirits case. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and dismissed it accordingly.