9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder]. The appellants are manufacturers of non-alloy steel products falling under Chapter 72 of the CETA Schedule. During the material period, they were working under compounded levy scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act. Accordingly, they had to discharge the duty liability in respect of their products on the basis of the Annual Capacity of Production (ACP) of their Mill determi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n account of time-bar and unjust enrichment. The appeal filed by the assessee against the decision of the original authority did not succeeded in full. The lower appellate authority allowed the claim but credited the amount to the consumer welfare fund. Hence the present appeal. The only issue arising for consideration is whether the above refund claim can be held to be hit by the bar of unjust en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of default. Hence it cannot be said that the compounded levy scheme (which is no more in force) was self-contained in all respects. It lacked recovery mechanism. In the circumstances, the general provisions of Section 11A of the Act would be invocable for recovery of any amount of duty non-paid or short-paid, by the manufacturers who were working under the compounded levy scheme. This view, howev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) E.L.T. 345 (Tri.-Bang.)] cited by ld. SDR, it was held by a co-ordinate Circuit Bench (Hyderabad) that the doctrine of unjust enrichment was applicable to such refund claims also. 3. As I am confronted by conflicting decisions of the Tribunal, I am unable to proceed further in the present case. In the circumstances, Registry is directed to place the records before the Hon ble President for con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
