9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... burden of proof was discharged by the respondent by producing certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant which was not considered by either of the lower authorities - Tribunal was only following judgment of the Madras High Court in CC, Chennai v. Venkataeswara Hospitals [2009 (4) TMI 925 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], which took the view that the concept of unjust enrichment would not be applicable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of entry filed for clearing the lamp in question, the goods were classified under CTH 9018.19, and duty payable thereon was 25% + Nil + 4%. However, the Department classified the lamp under CTH 8539.29 with duty payable at 35% + 16% + 4%. Though the respondent paid the duty as demanded under protest, appeal was decided in their favour. However, on the refund application, order was passed sanctio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s only following judgment of the Madras High Court in CC, Chennai v. Venkataeswara Hospitals [2015 (323) E.L.T. 359 (Mad.)], which took the view that the concept of unjust enrichment would not be applicable to the import of capital goods. These findings of the Tribunal, according to us, are not vitiated by any illegality for interference. 6. Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
