2019 (11) TMI 1686 - AT - Service Tax

Entitlement to the refund of deposits made by him during investigation, on success of appeal - requirement to pass the test of unjust enrichment - HELD THAT - Though the assessee has produced Chartered Accountant s certificate in support of their plea inasmuch as deposits were made in lump sum amount during the period of investigation and the same were not recovered from the Customers. The Appellate Authority has referred to Hon ble Allahabad High Court judgement in the case of EBIZ. COM PVT. LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX AND OTHERS 2016 (9) TMI 1405 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT laying down that principles of unjust enrichment are not applicable to the amounts paid during investigation and adjudication. Inasmuch as the law declared by the jurisdictional high court is binding on the Tribunal, there are no merits in the Revenue s appeal - appeal rejected.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) by the Revenue.
2. Entitlement to refund of deposits made during investigation by the assessee.
3. Application of the principle of unjust enrichment to the deposits made during investigation.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD dealt with an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the Revenue's appeal as the Original Adjudicating Authority's order was in favor of the assessee. The main issue in the appeal was whether the assessee is entitled to a refund of deposits made during the investigation, and if the principle of unjust enrichment applies to these deposits. The assessee had submitted a Chartered Accountant's certificate stating that the deposits were made in a lump sum during the investigation period and were not recovered from customers.

The Appellate Tribunal considered the relevant case law, specifically a judgment by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of EBIZ.COM PVT. LTD. v/s COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS & S.T., which held that the principle of unjust enrichment does not apply to amounts paid during investigation and adjudication. The Tribunal noted that the law declared by the jurisdictional high court is binding on them. Therefore, based on the precedent set by the High Court, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and rejected it accordingly.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order, emphasizing that the principle of unjust enrichment does not apply to deposits made by the assessee during the investigation period, as established by the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court.