9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch duty to any other person. This provision is not at all attracted. There is basic error in approach by the Authorities below as the assessee has not filed any application under Section 11B of the Act for refund of the excise duty paid by him. There is no question of application of principles of unjust enrichment as incorporated in Section 11B. In favour of assessee. - 2050 of 2000 - - - Dated:- 27-2-2003 - M.B. Shah and D.M. Dharmadhikari, JJ. [Judgment per : M.B. Shah, J.]. - M/s. Hindustan Metal Pressing Works removed the excisable goods at the effective rate of duty awaiting approval of their classification list No. 2/88 in which they claimed benefit of exemption Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986. In pursuance o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of RT-12. Admittedly, there is no mistake or error in such assessment or refund. Hence, it is his submission that principles of unjust enrichment would not be applicable in the present case. 4.As against this, it has been pointed out that though classification list was approved in June, 1988, the appellant continued to collect duty of excise on enhanced rate from the beginning of financial year 1988-89 even though they were availing benefit of exemption Notification No. 175/86 in the preceding financial year and, therefore, Assistant Commissioner was justified in coming to the conclusion that the appellant had intentionally paid excise duty with an intent to get the same by way of refund and to become enriched with the public money. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h pay the amount so collected to the credit of the Central Government. If such amount is not paid to the credit of the Central Government, the Central Excise Officer can serve a notice requiring him to show cause why the said amount should not be paid by him to the credit of the Central Government. As stated above, the amount was refunded to the assessee in 1989, hence there is no question of application of this provision. 7.Further, it would be difficult to hold that past finalized transaction could be reopened by holding that refund was erroneously granted as there was unjust enrichment. Considering Rule 173-I of the Rules and Section 11A of the Act, this Court in Serai Kella Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. v Collector of Central Excise, Patna [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. A copy of the return so computed by the proper officer has to be sent to the assessee. The duty assessed and paid by the assessee on self-assessment will be set off against the duty assessed by the proper officer. If the duty paid by the proper officer on final assessment is more than the duty determined and paid by the assessee, the assessee has to pay the deficiency by making a debit in the account-current within ten days of the receipt of the copy of the return from the proper officer. If the duty on final assessment payable by the assessee is less than what he has actually paid, the assessee is entitled to take credit in the account-current for the excess payment. No question of any show-cause notice under Section 11A arises a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
