9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1449X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the inputs were actually used to manufacture final products. The Commissioner(Appeals) has passed a perfunctionary order without discussing the complete facts in the background of the judicial precedents in the matter - the matter of unjust enrichment needs to be remanded. Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand. - C/370/08 - FO/A/75095/2017 - Dated:- 10-2-2017 - Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member(Judicial) Shri S.K. Naskar, AC(AR) for the Revenue Shri Agnibesh Sengupta, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per: Shri P.K. Choudhary Briefly stated the facts of the case are that M/s. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd., the Respondent herein, filed refund claim of duty to the tune of ₹ 2,16,613.80 and ₹ 60,24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e two aspects involved, the first is whether refund is admissible, when, the respondent did not challenge the assessment. The Commissioner(Appeals) referred to the Apex Court's decision by a three Judges Bench in the case of Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. v. CC [2002 (143) ELT 482(SC )], which has permitted consideration of refund claim, even when no appeal was filed against the assessment made on the Bills of Entry. The next aspect to be considered is whether the refund claim is hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment. 4. I find that that the first issue is squarely covered in favour of the respondent by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. v. CC, Delhi [2010 (250) ELT 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15 (329) ELT 109 (Made)]. 6. I find that the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn.Ltd. v. CC(Imports), Mumbai [2015 (328) ELT 490(Tri.-Mumbai) on the identical issue decided in favour of the importer after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Aman Medical Products Ltd. (supra). 7. I find in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. (supra), the assessee paid higher rate of duty inadvertence without there being an order of assessment. In the present case the respondent paid the duty inadvertence without noticing the exemption notification which was not disputed by the Revenue, Hence the present case is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ama ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
