TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 625X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the date of debit of the duty – Held that: - was not liable to pay any duty, therefore, the Tribunal could not reject their application for refund, as it would tantamount to unjust enrichment of the State. - 3 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 27-4-2010 - Ashutosh Mohunta and Mehinder Singh Sullar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY: Shri Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate, for the Petitioner. Shri H.P.S. Ghuman, SSC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for refund has been filed beyond the period of 6 months from the date of debit of the duty. 3. On the basis of the aforementioned facts, the petitioner filed an application before this Court for referring the case and this Court vide order dated 12-7-2007, directed the Tribunal to refer the following questions of law for adjudication "(1) Whether the claim for refund filed on 7-1-1999 within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts shows that the Indian Oil Corporation, Panipat Refinery were not liable to pay any duty on the goods cleared to bonded warehouses. Despite this, they paid the duty and subsequently on a letter written by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise filed an application claiming refund of the duty paid by them erroneously. The rejection of application by the Central Excise authorities on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
