2000 (2) TMI 134 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Whether refund can be sanctioned without producing duty paying documents and whether refund is hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Refund Claim Pertaining to Period 1-3-1970 to 30-9-1974:
- Appellants disputed inclusion of freight charges in assessable value.
- Appellate Tribunal allowed appeal for not including transportation cost in assessable value.
- Refund claim rejected for non-production of duty paying documents and unjust enrichment.
- Appellants divided refund claim into two parts.
- First part: Rs. 1,40,113.06 for period 1-3-1970 to 16-2-1972.
- Department issued DD-2 demanding differential duty, paid by appellants.
- Principle of unjust enrichment not applicable when duty paid separately.
- Second part: Rs. 14,06,177.45 for period 17-2-1972 to 30-9-1974.
- Freight charges included in assessable value as per Department's order.
- No opportunity given to show duty not passed on to customers.

Counter Arguments:
- Assessee must produce duty paying documents to prevent duplicate refunds.
- Documents submitted to Department kept for specified period and destroyed later.
- Production of duty paying documents essential for refund claim.
- Doctrine of unjust enrichment applicable for second period refund claim.

Judgment:
- Tribunal acknowledged duty paid for first period through debit entries in P.L.A.
- Presumption of duty passed on to buyer not attracted in this case.
- Non-production of documents not a hindrance to refund for first period.
- Appellants entitled to refund of Rs. 1,40,113.06 for first period.
- Remaining refund claim not paid due to duty incidence passed on to customers.
- Appellants failed to provide evidence to counter unjust enrichment bar.
- Second part of refund claim denied based on principle of unjust enrichment.

Conclusion:
- Appeal disposed of with refund granted for first period but denied for second period based on unjust enrichment principle.