Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 556 - HC - CustomsRefund claim - unjust enrichment - retrospective effect of amendment or not? - Whether the provisions of unjust enrichment inserted in Rule 9(B)(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 vide Notification No.45/99-CE(NT) dated 25.6.1999 could be invoked and applied retrospectively on transaction effected prior to the date of the issue of the Notification i.e. during the period April, 1997 to March, 1998? Held that: - Revenue has tried to justify on the ground of unjust enrichment. He has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court which has been made retrospective effect and in our considered opinion, when the competent authority i.e. Superintendent, Central Excise Range-I has passed the order of refund, it will not be appropriate to adjudicate the same issue in a refund application preferred by the assessee, more particularly when he has specifically made a declaration and last time when the matter was argued, counsel for the appellant has specifically made the point that the tax which has been paid was part of the price which has been recovered. The Tribunal and all other authorities committed a serious error in refusing to refund the amount and after the order passed which was not challenged. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.
|