9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 459X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (Oral)]. This is a Revenue appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 321/2003 (P), dated 15-7-2003 holding that there is no unjust enrichment and the refund claim filed by the assessee of required to be accepted. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has examined the facts of the case and has examined the evidence to see as to whether the element of duty was passed on to the assessee or not. After ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l) it was held that Refund - Limitation - Duty paid twice on the same goods - Time limit computable from the date of excess payment of duty and not from the date of the original payment - Claim having filed within prescribed time limit, not barred by limitation - Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 applicable and not Section 13 or 23 ibid . In the case of Voltas Ltd. v. Collector of Central Exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d goods - Rule 173H of Central Excise Rules, 1944 not providing any time limit for removal of such goods - Collector cannot impose any condition for removal of such goods within six month by issuing Trade Notices. [para 3] In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore v. Medi Caps Ltd. - 2002 (140) E.L.T. 469 (Tri. - Del.) it was held that Refund - Returned goods - D-3 intimation duly s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise Act, 1944. [paras 2, 3] Respectfully following the ratio of the decisions cited supra, I set aside the impugned order of the lower authority and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any. 2. I have heard learned DR who reiterated the grounds of appeal and submitted that there was clear passing of duty to the buyer and hence it was hit by unjust enrichment. He has attempted to di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
