Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1100 - CESTAT CHENNAIRefund of excess amount paid - amount credited to Consumer Welfare Fund - unjust enrichment - Held that:- The certificate of the Chartered Accountant referred, as submitted by the Ld. Advocate, is directed to be considered, forms the essential document per se. The other document namely the certificate from the statutory auditor as required by the Commissioner (Appeals) herein could only be considered at best a supporting evidence only if there was any iota of doubt on the primary evidence namely the Certificate of Chartered Accountant referred to and accepted by the Hon’ble High Court. Therefore, the certificate of statutory auditor required and observed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as not furnished, could not be treated as a primary document itself, to deny any benefit in the nature of refund as in the case on hand. The concept of unjust enrichment has a serious impact and has to be weighed carefully by the revenue and it cannot be an automatic choice for the revenue to reject every claim and credit / deposit the amount into ‘Consumer Welfare Fund’ under the guise of unjust enrichment - In the case on hand, the first certificate of Chartered Accountant accepted by the Hon’ble High Court itself contained a specific plea that the assessee / appellant has not passed on the duty incidence to its customers, which fact has not at all been disputed by the authorities below. This itself carves the case of the appellant out of mischief of Section 11B and the scope of ‘unjust enrichment’. The rejection of refund by the revenue authorities is contrary to law and unsustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|