9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Order No. A/1767/2006-WZB/C -IV/(SMB) - Dated:- 14-9-2006 - [Order per] - Heard both sides. The Assistant Commissioner (Import) had sanctioned an amount of Rs. 58,172/- as refund of excess anti-dumping duty paid by the assessee holding that there has not been any unjust enrichment as the imported goods in question were consumed in the manufacturing of the final product and the prices of final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment' can be invoked to deny the benefit to which a person is not otherwise entitled. Section 11B of the Act or similar provision merely gives legislative recognition of this doctrine. That, however, does not mean that in absence of statutory provision, a person can claim or retain undue benefit. Before claiming a relief of refund, it is necessary for the petition/appellant to show that he has pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the goods or value of the goods but only on account of reduction of rate of duty. More so assessment order is in favour of the assessee and no challenge would arise. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellants further place reliance in support of his contention latest decision of this Tribunal in the case CCE, Ahmedabad v. Hindalco Industries Ltd. - 2006 (199) E.L.T. 481 (Tri.-Mum.) which i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Allied Photographics India Ltd. and applied the same in preference to the ratio held by the Supreme Court in Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Limited. Therefore, the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the above two decisions referred to in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants in accordance with law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
