9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory gate invoices and depot invoices during the relevant period to come to the finding with regard to unjust enrichment. Therefore, at the relevant time, the Depot price would be Rs. 80/- and the duty leviable on Rs. 80/- at 16% would be Rs. 12.80. It is clear that the Respondent collected only Rs. 12.80 as duty from the buyer. But he paid Rs. 16/- to the Exchequer. So he would be entitled for a refund of Rs. 16.00 - Rs. 12.80 = Rs. 3.20. Since lower duty has been collected from the buyer, there is no unjust enrichment. The issue is as simple as this. Since during the original proceedings, the Assistant Commissioner has scrutinized all the invoices and the Commissioner (Appeals) has also checked invoices at random, we are satisfied that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2003 remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) to examine the issue of unjust enrichment. Accordingly, in the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has examined the issue and recorded the following observations :- "8. I have examined every impugned Order-in-Original carefully, and scrutinized random invoices covering the disputed period; raised by the appellant at the factory gate, and corresponding depot invoices. I find that the appellant has not been paid any consideration over and above the amount invoiced at the depot, in all the cases examined. Therefore, I am satisfied that in every case, the refund is admissible even after applying the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The impugned orders are not legally sustainable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been recorded - "She (learned SDR) said that the department has no grievance with reference to the entitlement of refund, but nevertheless the authority below has not examined the issue with reference to the provisions of unjust enrichment". Therefore, the only issue before us is whether there is unjust enrichment or not in the present cases. Unjust enrichment normally arises when more duty than what has been paid to the Exchequer is collected from the buyers. There is always a statutory presumption that the duty burden is always passed on to the buyer. In the peculiar circumstances of these cases, we find that on stock transfer to depot, the Respondents have paid duty on the basis of factory gate price which is always higher than the depot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
