9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red physician samples manufactured on their own as well as manufactured on loan licence basis on payment of duty. The valuation of the physician sample was in dispute with the authorities. The said dispute was resolved favour of the appellant. Subsequently, appellant filed refund claim of Rs. 5,29,687/- in respect of duty paid on such physician sample. The said refund claim was sought to be rejected on the ground that the question of unjust enrichment arises in such cases. The adjudicating authority has held that the appellant has raised the credit note of the amount of the duty paid on the physicians sample and recovered the same from their principal. As such, refund claim of the amount of duty on the physician samples, which were cleared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the other hand, submits that the question as regards the unjust enrichment has been squarely answered by both the lower authorities. It is his submission that the appellant having collected the amount from the principal manufacturer will be unjustly enriched if the refund is sanctioned to them. He reiterates the entire finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. Considered the submissions made at length by both sides. The issue involved in this case is that the appellant was sanctioned refund claim and on an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order-in-original. During the pendency of such proceedings, a show cause notice was issued for recovery of erroneous refund sanctioned to them. The issue before me is whether the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the extent it is setting aside the refund claim is liable to be set aside and do so with consequential relief to the appellant. 5. As regard the refund of the balance amount of Rs. 3,82,745/- of the duty paid on the physician samples, which were cleared by the appellant as job worker, it is seen from the records and undisputed that the appellant has cleared the physician samples on payment of duty and subsequently claimed the said amount from the principal manufacturer. The principal manufacturer has also reimbursed the entire amount of duty paid on such physician s sample. If that be so, the contention of the ld. Advocate that they are only collecting the duty and paying to the Revenue does not arise. Since the principal manufacturer h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
