9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) wherein the order-in-original was set aside. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents filed a Bill of Entry for the import of various items including cosmetics of Chinese origin. After 'second check' examination the value of the cosmetic items were loaded on the basis of contemporaneous import and it was found that the value ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be refunded to the respondents without crediting of the same to the Consumer Welfare Fund. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue is before me. 3. Heard both sides. 4. Considering the arguments advanced by both the sides, the issue comes out that whether the refund of fine and penalty is subject to doctrine of unjust enrichment. 5. Shri N.A. Sayyed, learned JDR submits that the issue is well d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on'ble Bombay High Court has clearly distinguished the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. (supra) and held that principle of unjust enrichment would not arise in the case of the refund of redemption fine and penalty. 7. On careful examination of the submissions made by both the parties, I have arrived at a decision that the ratio of the case United Spirits Ltd. (supra) is squarely applicabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
