2008 (1) TMI 139

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ination in this appeal is whether the bar of unjust enrichment is attracted against the respondent herein who sought refund of pre-deposit made by them during the pendency of the appeal before the lower appellate authority. 2. I have heard both sides and find that the issue stands settled by the Bombay High Court's judgment in Suvidhe Ltd. vs. UOI -1996 (82) ELT 177 (Bom) which was upheld by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ills 2002 (150) ELT 430 which has been upheld by the Punjab & Haryana High Court as reported in 2007 (210) ELT 342 (P&H).  Therefore, whichever way the matter is viewed, the assessees are entitled to refund which has been granted by the Commissioner (Appeals). I, accordingly, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal. 3. The cross objection is disposed of accordingly. (Dictated in Cou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X