2016 (11) TMI 986

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... p; For the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 423/2013 CUS (B) dated 13.11.2015, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has upheld the Order-in-Original and rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2.  Briefly, the facts of the present case is that the appellant was importing Mechanical seals from their related company, M/s S.K.F. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ved by the same, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the learned Commissioner (Appeals)  vide impugned order rejected the appeal and upheld the impugned order passed by the  lower authority. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3.  Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4.  The learned counsel for the appellant su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stoms Tariff Act, 1975.  He also submitted that once it is proved that  EDD is in the nature of security deposit with the Department then the principles of 'unjust enrichment' is not applicable for refund of the same.   In support of this submission, he relied upon the following decisions : (i) C.C., Chennai Vs. Minerva Trade Links (P) Ltd. [2009 (233) E.L.T. 399 (Tri.-Chennai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... im and refund amount was shown as receivable in their books of accounts during the relevant period. 6.  After considering the submissions of both the parties and on perusal of the records and the judgments cited supra, I am of the considered opinion that the case of the appellant is squarely covered by the judgments cited supra.   Further, I find that in the judgments cited supra,& .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing refund of the same. The Commissioner (Appeals) has taken a correct view that the amount deposited is more than the duty amount and the same is refundable. We agree with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). There is no merit in the appeal and the same is rejected." 7.  In view of the above discussion, the impugned order is not sustainable in law.  Therefore, I set aside the sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X