TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact was not disputed, the denial of refund is unjustified. The Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Pune-I Vs. Volkswagen India Private Limited [2013 (11) TMI 1534 - CESTAT MUMBAI] observed that Excise duty paid second time by mistake on clearance of goods, question of unjust enrichment would not arise. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. ST/750 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x by cash through Cenvat Credit Account and also submitted ST-3 Returns but M/s. MCL refused to reimburse the Service Tax levied with the bills. After negotiation with M/s. MCL, the appellant again paid the Service Tax. Thus, the appellant discharged Service Tax liability twice in the same service and filed a refund claim. 3. The Adjudicating authority allowed the refund of ₹ 18,36,219.00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that Excise duty paid second time by mistake on clearance of goods, question of unjust enrichment would not arise. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below: We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. The claim for refund would arise only when excess payment of duty is made. In the present case, refund of duty has arisen when the payment was ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Revenue that the appellant has passed on the duty incidence twice to the customers. No customer will pay duty twice for the same set of goods. Therefore, the question of unjust enrichment would not arise at all. On a similar matter, in the case of Cipla Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2013 (295) E.L.T. 696 , this Tribunal had occasion to consider refund of duty when duty was paid t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
