2008 (2) TMI 152

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ispute that the duty incidence was not availed by the customers - held that the assessee is eligible for refund – unjust enrichment not applicable - E/1072/2006-SM(BR) - 608/2008-SM(BR)(PB), - Dated:- 4-2-2008 - Shri P.K. Das, Member (J) [Order per]- The appellant filed this appeal against rejection of the refund claim on the ground of unjust enrichment. 2. The relevant facts of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the adjudicating authority allowed the refund claim after examining the certificate of Superintendent as well as credit notes. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Bharat Box Factory Ltd. reported in 2007 (218) E.L.T. 355 (P H). He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Bharat Box Factory Ltd. (supra) rejected the Revenue's appeal on the question as under :- "Whether post-clearance adjustment like issuance of credit notes by the assessee who is claiming refund, to buyers of the goods, taking back the burden of duty on the goods would help the assessee to get over the bar of unjust enrichment under Section 11B of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X