TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant has rightly entitled for the refund claim under N/N. 16/95-C.E. (N.T.). Whether the bar of unjust enrichment is applicable to the appellant or not, admittedly, the duty has been paid by the appellant and the goods have been sent to their unit or stock transfer basis. In that circumstances, the Gorakhpur unit is not entitled to take credit on those goods, therefore, the question of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t filed refund claim which was returned back to their Gorakhpur unit stating that as duty has been paid by the appellant, therefore, the appellant is required to file the refund claim. In these set of facts, the appellant filed refund claim with the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise Division, Sonepat. The refund claim was rejected on the ground that they have no jurisdiction to entertain the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods exported are duty paid or not? (c) That the appellant has not followed the prescribed procedure for export the goods under Notification 16/95-C.E. (N.T.). 3. The Ld. Commissioner (A) set aside the order of adjudication for allowing the refund claim. 4. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. I f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, the question of bar of unjust enrichment is not arises. 8. It is not in disputed fact that the goods sold by the appellant are the part of the goods exported by the Gorakhpur unit to Nepal. In that circumstances, argument of the ld. AR is not acceptable that it is not ascertainable whether the goods exported are duty paid or not unless contrary is proved. 9. In that circumstances, I hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
