TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, I do not find any force in the argument of the learned A.R. that in the remand proceedings the refund claim has been rejected on the new ground. Further, in the case of Hindalco Industries Ltd. (2006 (2) TMI 337 - CESTAT, MUMBAI), this Tribunal held that in the case of provisional assessment, after following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Allied Photographics India Ltd. (2003 (11) TMI 91 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) and the decision of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd., bar of unjust enrichment is not applicable. following the decision of Allied Photographics India Ltd. (supra) - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/305/2006-Mum - Final Order No. A/253/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 21-1-2014 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t documents. On appeal before this Tribunal the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority to consider the documents produced by the appellant to ascertain whether the duty has been paid by the appellant or not. In the remand proceedings, it was held that the appellants are entitled for refund but the same was credited into the Consumer Welfare Fund as they have not passed the bar of unjust enrichment. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before me. 4. The contention of the appellant is that as the refund claim has arisen out of the provisional assessment therefore, bar of unjust enrichment is not applicable in the light of the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. Allied Photographics India - 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the adjudicating authority would not have considered the issue of bar of unjust enrichment. Therefore, the ground raised by the learned Advocate that they have rejected the refund claim on the new ground is not acceptable. In fact, while considering the refund claim it was found that they are entitled for the refund claim and at this stage the issue of bar of unjust enrichment comes. Therefore, I do not find any force in the argument of the learned A.R. that in the remand proceedings the refund claim has been rejected on the new ground. Further, in the case of Hindalco Industries Ltd. (supra), this Tribunal held that in the case of provisional assessment, after following the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Allied Photograp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
