TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... INDIA] clearly held that in respect of all the refunds even not covered under Section 11B, unjust enrichment is applicable - even in case of refund of pre-deposit amount, the provisions of unjust enrichment is applicable. The appellant shall be given sufficient opportunity of personal hearing and for submitting necessary documents to prove their case on the aspect of unjust enrichment - appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the order of the refund sanctioning authority. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order of the Original Adjudicating authority therefore the appellant is before me. 2. Shri Anupam Dighe, ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that refund is admittedly against pre-deposit made under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In respect of the refund of such pre-deposit unjust enrichme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icable. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 5. I find that the adjudicating authority held that unjust enrichment is not applicable in case of refund of pre-deposit made under Section 35F following certain judgments. I find that the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. (supra) clearly held that in respect of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he adjudicating authority to examine the said factual matrix which he failed to do so. Therefore appellant deserve for one more opportunity to establish their case in respect of unjust enrichment. I therefore set side the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority to verify the facts as discussed above and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. Needless to say, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
