9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been imported by the appellant during the period August to November 1999. At the port of discharge the ships which brought the cargo had to be anchored in the sea a few nautical miles away from the jetty for want of sufficient draft. At the anchorage point, the cargo was discharged from the vessel into barges which ferried the goods to the jetty. A dispute arose as to whether that the cost o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i-Chennai). In this decision, it was held that since the sale price of final product viz. fertilizers manufactured by the appellant is decided by the Government of India from time to time, the question of unjust enrichment of imported capital goods does not arise. Revenue is in appeal against this decision. 3. Learned SDR, on behalf of the Revenue, submitted that the Tribunal had relied up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . No one appeared on behalf of the appellant. However, written submissions have been received. In the written submissions, the appellants have stated that in their own case, the matter has already been decided in their favour and the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly relied upon the decision. 5. I have considered the submissions made by both sides. In view of the decision of Larger Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use the goods manufactured were capital goods in that case and in this case the goods are traded. I find that the ratio of the decision has been correctly interpreted and applied by Commissioner (Appeals) and therefore when the sale price of the final product is decided by Government from time to time, the question of unjust enrichment does not arise. 6. In view of the above, I find no merits in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
