2009 (2) TMI 328

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. It appears that the imported goods were cleared by the appellant on payment of duty at the rate of 50% instead of paying 5%. The appellant filed an application for refund of the excess duty which was rejected. The matter was carried up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, by order dated 13-3-2001 held as under : "Learned counsel for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f this Court in Keshari Steels v. Collector of Customs, Bombay [2000 (115) E.L.T. 320 (Bom.)] has held that the rejection of refund claim of the appellant as being time-barred under the provisions of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not in accordance with law. The Tribunal however remanded the matter to consider the question of unjust enrichment. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X