9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y refundable. As regard unjust enrichment it is an admitted fact that no documentary evidences were submitted by the appellant before the lower authority. However it appears from the nature of supplies and the certificate issued by the project authority that duty is not payable on the consignment - Needless to say that appellant should be given sufficient opportunity of personal hearing and for submission of the documents as required with regard to the aspect of unjust enrichment. The original adjudicating authority is expected to pass a de novo adjudication order within a period of three months from the date of this order - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. E/1598/06 - ORDER No.A/94306/16/SMB - Dated:- 11-11-2016 - Shri R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t submits that it is wrong to say that they have not claimed exemption Notification No.108/95-CE as they have submitted letter claiming the exemption notification to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner along with the Project Authority certificate which is the requirement under the notification. However the exemption was denied by the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the certificate issued by the project authority is in the name different from the name of the appellant. In this regard, he submits that it is not a different company in whose name the certificate was issued there is only a change of the name of the company whereas the constitution of the company remained intact. However subsequent to the clearance of the goods, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise, Belapur-III, Division giving up the exemption Notification No. 108/95-CE therefore after clearance they cannot make any claim. As regard unjust enrichment, it is his submission that no documentary evidence was submitted before the lower authority, therefore the refund was rightly rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment also. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that it is apparent on record that before clearance of the goods the appellant had made a claim before the Assistant Commissioner on exemption Notification No. 108/95. In this regard they had submitted the required certificate from the project authority to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner who denied the exemption on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
