Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 854 - AT - Central ExciseRefund claim - suo motto adjustment of the excess payment against the short payment of Central Excise duty - unjust enrichment - Held that:- The refunds under Indirect taxes have to cross the bar of ‘Unjust Enrichment’. If the amount of Tax/Duty sought to be refunded has been recovered from the buyers, then the claimant is not entitled to refund. Even if the such amount of tax, though not directly recovered from the client, but has been charged to expenses in the books of accounts, then also it is consistently held that the claimant has indirectly recovered the tax and hence failed to cross the bar of Unjust Enrichment. The only possible way to pass the bar of Unjust Enrichment is that the disputed tax /duty is not expenses off in the accounts, but booked as ‘Receivables’. Tribunal has in case of Philips Electronics India Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I [2010 (4) TMI 449 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] has held that CA’s certificate of non-recovery of duty loses its probative value, it certified that amount shown as expenses in profit & loss a/c whereas assessee collected cum-duty prices. Further if amount shown in P&L account, it must have been factored into price of goods manufactured. Refund hit by bar of unjust enrichment. Appeal dismissed.
|