TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f unjust enrichment - amount paid by the respondent during the course of investigation was treated as deposit and that finding was not further challenged by the department, principles of unjust enrichment cannot be applied - appeal is dismissed - 403 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 4-12-2009 - K.A. Puj and Rajesh H. Shukla, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri A.Y. Kogje, for the Appellant. Shri Dhav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent and perused the appeal memo as well as the orders passed by the CESTAT. 3. While allowing the appeal of the respondent, the Tribunal observed in its order [2009 (233) E.L.T. 105 (Tri. - Ahmd.)] that the only issue involved in this case is regarding amount deposited by the respondent during the course of investigation before the authorities. The show-cause notice was issued to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und of unjust enrichment. On an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) held in favour of the respondent after following the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Jayant Glass Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2002 (5) RLT 98 (T). Before the Tribunal, a specific query was raised and in reply to that query, the learned departmental representative was not in a position to confirm as to whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
