9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)] - The brief facts are contained in Para 1 of the order of the original adjudicating authority, which for convenience are being reproduced below :- "M/s Arvind Enterprises filed Bills of Entry No. 8837 and 8725 both dated 25-2-97 for import of 19.4 MT and 19.2 MT of C.A. off cuts respectively. Both these Bills of Entry were assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts were adjusted from the duty originally paid by them. The importer filed a Refund application on 14-10-97 for excess amount paid against the C.A. off cuts." 2. It is seen from the above that the dispute in the present appeal is as to whether refund filed by the appellant is to be barred by limitation or not. The said dispute was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not payable under the Customs Act, 1962 i.e. it was mistakenly paid without any of the provisions of the Act. In view of the aforesaid case, it appears to be well settled that in present case too, limitation of six month is not applicable regarding filling of refund claims, when goods (C.A. off cuts), for which importer had paid duty, did not arrive in India. Further, unjust enrichment provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the department on 13-6-97. In the adjudication order, it was clearly held that the duty payable on the scrap was being adjusted from the duty originally paid by the appellant. As such, it can be concluded that the refund of excess amount paid by the assessee was due to them as consequence of the adjudication order. The use of expression adjusted also indicates that the excess deposits are r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
