2000 (8) TMI 134 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
Dispute over refund claim for central excise duty paid during December 1990 to December 1992, denial of refund on grounds of unjust enrichment, interpretation of provisions related to finalization of provisional assessments.

Summary:

The dispute in this case arose from a refund claim filed by the appellants for central excise duty paid between December 1990 to December 1992. The appellants had claimed various deductions such as discount, freight, special packing, and handling charges. The assessments were initially made provisional, with only certain deductions allowed. Subsequently, the assessments were finalized in April 1992, but the refund of excess duty paid was denied citing unjust enrichment. The matter was appealed to the Collector who remanded the case for a fresh decision. The Assistant Commissioner then allowed all deductions claimed by the appellants but still denied the refund. The appellants challenged this decision before the Commissioner (Appeals) and then before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Court No. I, New Delhi.

During the hearing, the appellants' counsel argued that previous Tribunal decisions supported the view that refunds from finalization of provisional assessments are not subject to unjust enrichment. However, the Departmental Representative cited a Supreme Court judgment stating that refunds resulting from appellate orders are not affected by the provisions related to provisional assessment. The Tribunal examined the records and submissions, concluding that the refund in this case was a result of finalizing the provisional assessment, not an appellate relief. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellants based on previous Tribunal orders.