9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 395 - AT - CustomsRefund claim - unjust enrichment - finalization of provisional assessments - Held that - the present case is no more res integra and has been settled by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in favour of the respondent in the respondent s own case Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore 2015 (5) TMI 768 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT , wherein the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka has held that unjust enrichment shall not be applicable when the provisional assessment of Bills of Entry was done prior to 13.7.2006 - In the present case, finalisation of the impugned Bills of Entry was done prior to amendment to Section 18 i.e., prior to 13.7.2006 - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Original allowing refund claim - Application of unjust enrichment clause - Provisional assessment prior to 13.7.2006 - Public sector undertaking exemption. Analysis: The appeal was filed by Revenue against an Order-in-Original setting aside the original decision, where the respondent-assessee imported crude petroleum for manufacturing. The dispute arose due to the exclusion of freight charges in the value of imported goods, resulting in a duty confirmation of ?4.91 crores. The respondent appealed to CESTAT, which upheld the decision and remanded for duty computation. A subsequent Order-in-Original confirmed an excess payment of ?1,20,51,866, leading to a refund claim. The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund, allocating amounts to the appellant and Consumer Welfare Fund. The respondent appealed, challenging the unjust enrichment clause's application and its exemption as a public sector undertaking. The Revenue argued that the impugned order was unsustainable, citing the unjust enrichment clause for assessments pre-13.7.2006. They referenced the case of CC Vs. Scientific Instruments Co. Ltd. In contrast, the respondent's counsel defended the order, citing a Karnataka High Court judgment favoring the respondent on the unjust enrichment issue for provisional assessments pre-amendment. They also referenced supportive decisions like CC Vs. Hindalco Industries Ltd., IOCL Vs. CC Jamnagar, Commissioner Vs. TVS Suzuki Ltd., and Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs. CC. After hearing both parties and reviewing the cited judgments, the Tribunal found the issue settled in favor of the respondent by the Karnataka High Court and other courts. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal based on the precedent set by the Karnataka High Court. The judgment was pronounced on 18/07/2017.
|
