TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 526X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of bar of unjust enrichment being not applicable in respect of refund of amounts in terms of rule 6 of CCR - the matter remanded to original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/87462/17 - A/91521/2017 - Dated:- 15-12-2017 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member(Judicial) Shri J.N. Somiya, Advocate for the Appellant Shri M.K. Mall, AC(AR) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsequently, the appellants had received two show cause cum demand notices dated 04.11.2010 and 06.09.2011 demanding an amount of ₹ 29,10,367/- (i.e. 10%/5%/6T% on the value of the bagasse sold by them during the period from May 08 to Mar. 11). The said demands were upheld by the Additional Commissioner, C.Ex., Pune-III and by the Assistant Commissioner, C.Ex., Solapur vide Order-in-Original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said amount has not been recovered from the customers, to whom the bagasse was sold. That the said was paid by them subsequent to the clearances and not produced in which case, the unjust enrichment principle would not apply inasmuch as such deposits were in the nature of pre-deposits. 3. They have also relied upon various decisions laying down that bar of unjust enrichment is not appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specific findings in respect of the various issues raised by the appellant. It has to be seen as to whether the deposits were made by the appellant subsequent to the sale invoices and at the instance of their jurisdictional central excise authorities. There is also no finding in respect of bar of unjust enrichment being not applicable in respect of refund of amounts in terms of rule 6 of Cenvat Cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
