Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2019 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 1156 - AT - CustomsRefund of revenue deposit and duty deposited by them at the time of importation - rejection on the ground of unjust enrichment, non-production of original copies of bill of entry as well as TR-6 challans evidencing payment of duty. Unjust Enrichment - ground of rejection is based on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of MRPL [2011 (1) TMI 1155 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] which has been reversed by the Karnataka High Court in the decision of MRPL [2015 (5) TMI 768 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] - HELD THAT:- This issue is no more res integra and has been settled by various High Courts and Tribunal in various cases, one being COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VERSUS HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD. [2008 (9) TMI 71 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that prior to the amendment dated 13.7.2006 in Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 principles of unjust enrichment is not applicable because the said principle has been incorporated only with effect from 13.7.2006 and has been held by the High Court to be prospective and not retrospective - thus, the principle of unjust enrichment is not applicable in the present case and denial of refund on this ground is not sustainable in law. Rejection on the ground of non-filing of the original document - HELD THAT:- Non-filing of the original document is also not a valid ground for rejection of the refund because the appellant has given justification for non-filing the original document and has also submitted that it is not required under law to file the original document in view of the decision in the case of SAMBHAV ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN [2010 (9) TMI 513 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|