2018 (8) TMI 1698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t below leading to erroneous observation on the Chartered Accountant certificate and refund claim - appellant is entitled to refund. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri T. Vishwanathan, Advocate for the appellant Shri Ahibaran, Addl. Commissioner(AR) for the respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The appellant Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. is in appeal against order of Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the rejection of claim for refund of revenue deposit on the ground of unjust enrichment. 2. The brief facts are the appellant imported Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. vide 31 bills of entry between August 2004 to November 2007. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e said amount was not passed on to any other person had not been, discharged by the appellant. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the appellant Shri T. Vishwanathan contends that the decision of Bombay High Court in United Spirits Ltd. stands overruled by the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Exports 2006 (200) ELT A138 (SC) wherein it was held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment shall apply prospectively in respect of revenue deposit with effect from 14.07.2006 and shall not have any retrospective effect. 6. We have considered the rival submission of the Ld. AR for revenue, who stated that the provisional assessment was finalized after 14.07.2006. The doctrine of unjust enrichment wi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SVB loading on imported cars have been shown with imports on Bombay Port Trust is ₹ 1,78,01,242/- and claim have not been filed for ₹ 33,90,000/- for which challans are yet to be traced. 8. Accordingly, we find that as the appellants have reflected the amount in the balance sheet on the asset side as amount receivables from the revenue department and they have also explained the reason for less claim being made which has escaped the attention of the Court below leading to erroneous observation on the Chartered Accountant certificate and refund claim. Accordingly, we hold that the appellant is entitled to the refund of the amount of ₹ 1,78,01,242/- minus ₹ 9,90,790/- and ₹ 58,822/- being last two bills of entr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X