9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim of penalty paid by the appellant has been rejected by the authorities below on the grounds of unjust enrichment. 2. The facts of the case are that initially the proceedings were initiated against the appellant for payment of service tax under the category of "Banking and Financial Institution Service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide its Final Order No. 52123-52124 of 2021 dated 24.12.2021 dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue by upholding the order of dropping the penalty against the appellant. After dropping of penalty by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant filed refund claim of refund of penalty deposited by them for filing the appeal before higher forum. The refund claim of penalty deposited by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Automation Pvt Ltd. 2016 (334) ELT 158 Tri- Mum). (ii) Anand Silk Mills vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import) Nhava Sheva-2010-TIOL-570-CESTATMUM (iii) Ratan Udyog vs. Commissioner of Cus. (Acc & Export), Mumbai-2014 (313) ELT 764 (Tri-Mum) Following the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in United Spirits Ld. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai-2009(240) ELT 513 (Bom). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve to pass the bar of unjust enrichment. In such circumstances, following the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Be Office Automation Pvt Ltd., Anand Silk Mills vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import) Nhava Sheva, Ratan Udyog vs. Commissioner of Cus. (Acc & Export), Mumbai, I hold that bar of unjust enrichment is not applicable to the facts of the case. 7. Therefore, I set aside the impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
