2014 (1) TMI 1564

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that for pre-deposit made by the assessee is not hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. 2. Revenue is of the opinion that every refund claim filed by the assessee is hit by bar of unjust enrichment. The Revenue in their appeal has relied on the decision in Sahakari Khand Udyog Ltd. 2005 (181) ELT 328 (SC) a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plicable although the amount paid from PLA. To support this claim, she relied on the decision of Suvidhe Ltd. vs. UOI 1996 (82) ELT 177, which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1997 (94) ELT A159(SC). 4. Heard both sides. Considered the submissions. 5. The fact that respondent has paid the disputed amount at the time of consideration of their appeal before he Commissioner (Appeals) as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X