9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant JUDGEMENT Per: Anil Choudhary: The Revenue is in appeal against rejection of its appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 31.08.2010. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent shipping company on conversion of foreign going vessel to coastal run, the Bill of Entry was assessed provisionally on 06.02.2009, which was subsequently assessed finally on 19.08.2009. The pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of unjust enrichment is attracted in the facts and circumstances of the case as the assessee might have transferred the cost indirectly for the services rendered during the coastal run. Further, it is not a case that the refund claim will be returned to the customers who received services and/or materials during the coastal run. The Commissioner(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the Revenue record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on estimate. It was held that such payment is not duty but only a deposit or notional amount on which doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable as provided under Section 27 read with Section 28D of the Customs Act, 1962. Being aggrieved, the Revenue is before this Tribunal. 3. The learned AR appearing for the Revenue, in addition to the grounds before the Commissioner (Appeals), has raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant's own case reported in 2013 (294) ELT 275 (Tri-Ahmd.) wherein ruling of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CC, Mangalore Vs. Agrotech Foods Ltd. - 2010 (249) ELT 348 (Kar.) was followed, wherein it was held that on the adjustment of amount paid on provisional basis, doctrine of unjust enrichment is not attracted and thus, prays for dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
