TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1805X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise Act 1944 specifically providing for refund of interest paid by an assessee. However I find taking note of the lack of provision in Section 11B for such refund, this Tribunal in the case of Mothersons Sumi Systems Ltd. [2006 (8) TMI 75 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], took a view that the amount has to be refunded. - the appellant is eligible for the refund. The fact remains that whether unjust enrichm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot include the value/cost of components. Thereafter proceedings were initiated and demand for differential duty, interest and penalty were confirmed and the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 1276/2005 dated 02.08.2005 held that the demand for differential duty was not sustainable and allowed the appeal. The order was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relies upon the decisions in the case of Suvidhe Ltd. Vs. Union of India [1996 (82) E.L.T. 177 (Bom.)],Mothersons Sumi Systems Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida [2007 (208) E.L.T. 209 (Tri.-Del.)] and CCE, Thane-II Vs. Mehta Pharmaceutical Indus. Ltd. [2005 (180) E.L.T. 26 (Tri.-Mumbai)] . Learned AR relies upon the decision in the case of J.C.T. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jalandhar [2009 (248) E.L.T. 884 (Tri.-Del.)]. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee. The Tribunal held that anywhere any amount is wrongly collected, the department cannot refuse refund on the ground that it is not provided under the statutory provisions of the refund. In view of the above decision of the Tribunal, the appellant's claim of the refund is maintainable. However, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case law relied upon by the Revenue i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der that the appellant is eligible for the refund. The fact remains that whether unjust enrichment would be attracted and whether the appellants have crossed the threshold has not been examined or considered by both the lower authorities. Therefore I consider it appropriate that matter should be remanded for the limited purpose of examination of applicability of unjust enrichment. Accordingly the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
