9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... richment as the assessee had allowed discount which entitled it to pay lesser duty - Held by the Tribunal that the present case was governed by the observations in para 14 of the judgment in M/s Allied Photographics Ltd. and the assessee became entitled to refund on account of excess duty paid as per order of final assessment - No substantial question of law arises - Hence, appeal is dismissed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional assessments? ii) Whether the CESTAT, New Delhi failed to appreciate the factum of unjust enrichment as laid out by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Allied Photographics India Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai-II reported as 2004 (166) ELT/3(SC) and has accordingly passed an erroneous order? 3. The assessee is registered under the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It paid duty on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of Rs.1,19,239/- was debited during the year 1996 for the clearances made during the period from July, 1987 to March, 1989, I do not find it believable that a stockiest will pay differential amount of duty after about 8-9 years. 4. The above view was upheld by the appellate authority. It was observed:- The facts on record indicate that provisional assessment was involved in instant cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 6. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 7. Learned counsel for the revenue submits that bar of unjust enrichment under Section 11B was applicable as it was not a case of refund on final assessment in respect of excess payment made under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 8. We are unable to accept the submission. The finding extracted above clearly shows that refu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
