9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned CESTAT in Appeal No.C/1486/2010-SM, Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore-CUS Vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd., 2. The question involved in the present case is for the period 13.01.1996 to 15.03.1998 with regard to 144 consignments imported by the respondent-assessee through IOCL and that the ground of unjust enrichment does not apply to the refund of custom duty paid by the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he relevant para 10 of the said judgment of co- ordinate bench dated 29.01.2015, is quoted below for ready reference: "10. Section 27 of the Act provides for claiming of refund of duty. It relates to a claim for refund of duty or interest paid by the assessee or borne by him in a case not falling under the provisional assessment. Sub-section (2) of Section 27 of the Act provides that any excess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if an assessee has to put forth a claim under Section 27 of the Act, there was no necessity for the parliament to introduce Sub-section (2) of Section 27 of the Act by way of Sub-section (5) of Section 18 of the Act. It only demonstrates Sections 18 and 27 are merely exclusive. Section 27 applies to a case of constitutional levy, illegal levy or a levy by mistake as held by the Apex Court in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich includes unjust enrichment. Therefore, it follows prior to the amendment, this doctrine of unjust enrichment was not attracted to refund claim under Section 18 of the Act." 5. In view of aforesaid position of law settled, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration in the present appeal and the present appeal filed by Revenue is also dismissed in the same terms as above. Cop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
