TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the balance sheet produced by the appellant. Commissioner’s order is not sustainable and hence set aside - Following decision of UOI v. Jain Spinners Ltd. [1992 (9) TMI 88 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Decided in favour of assessee. - C/1274/2006-Mum - Final Order No. A/817/2013-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 28-8-2013 - Shri S.K. Gaule, Member (T) Shri S.N. Kantawala, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K.S. Mishra, Addl. Comm. (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 513/2006/MCH/AC/Gr. IV/06, dated 17-10-2006 whereby the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the lower adjudicating authority s order. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im. Lower adjudicating authority sanctioned the refund claim of ₹ 12 lakhs in pursuant to Hon ble High Court order dated 21-6-2001, however, credited the same to Consumer Welfare Fund in terms of Section 27(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground that appellant failed to discharge the onus that incidence of duty has not been passed on. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the lower adjudicating authority s order. Hence the appeal. 4. The contention of the appellant is that they had locally procured the goods and the goods in question are not imported goods. The contention is that they have not recovered any amount of ₹ 12 lakh, pre-deposited by them, consequent to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the balance sheet. 7. I have carefully considered the submission and perused the record. 7.1 Admittedly, the issue whether refund is sanctionable or not, is not involved in this case since neither side is challenging the sanction of refund. The only dispute is whether doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable to the case or otherwise. Undisputedly, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Jain Spinners Ltd. (supra) held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment would also be applicable in the case of deposit of disputed amount. However, the appellant have been able to show that throughout they have been showing this amount in as receivables from the customs department, in their books of account. This has been supported by a Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
