9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder]. Present appeal is against the rejection of a Refund which was required to be paid as per direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Haryana dated 22-4-1991 within a period of three months. 2. The refund arose, as observed from SCN dated 25-10-95 consequent to Tribunal s Order-in-Appeal No. 226 to 248/87B-I, dated 15-11-87 which held that their product to be 'Bars' and not Strip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 was dismissed. Since the ground of limitation has been settled in the subject WP and there was no applicability of clause of unjust enrichment. 4. The Asstt. Collector passed an order rejecting the refund on account of unjust enrichment after inspecting the relevant documents and noting that duty was paid under protest therefore the claim was nor barred by limitation. 5. The Commissioner (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. - 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) which prescribes :- ......The provisions contemplate the pendency of the application on the date of the coming into force of the amendment, or the filing of an application which is contemplated under law, to obtain a refund, after the Amendment Act comes into force. I am of the opinion that if the said provisions are held applicable, eve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
