9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out of the order of provisional assessment for the period prior to 14.07.2006. The issue whether the public sector undertakings are outside the purview of unjust enrichment is concerned, the same is no more res integra and has already been adjudicated in Mafatlal Industries Limited Vs. Union of India, [ 1996 (12) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT ], wherein the Supreme Court has held that The doctrine of unjust enrichment is, however, inapplicable to the State. State represents the people of the country. No one can speak of the people being unjustly enriched. Thus, the doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable to the case of public sector undertakings - In view of this answer, it is not necessary to deal with the other substantial question of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the aforesaid duty was paid in excess on the ground that there was change in price due to change in port of discharge which resulted in reduction of freight. The claim for refund was rejected by the adjudicating authority vide order dated 04.02.2005 on the ground that the assessment was not challenged. 3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the appeal filed by the respondent vide order dated 25.07.2005. The revenue thereupon filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the revenue by an order dated 13.02.2006 on the ground that the Committee of Disputes clearance was not obtained. In pursuance of the order passed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arises from the order of provisional assessment under Section 18 of the Act which contains a provision for refund of the duty. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the respondent has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in CCE, Bangalore-II Vs. Karnataka State Agro Corporation Limited, 2006 (202) ELT 47 (Kar). 7. We have considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. The solitary issue which arises for consideration in this appeal is with regard to applicability of unjust enrichment in the cases of provisional assessment for the period prior to 14.07.2006 and also to public sector undertakings for sanctioning of refund of excess duty to be paid at the time of provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
