9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1061X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted and subsequently, the Original Authority granted refund in the light of the Order passed by this Tribunal vide its Final Order No.A/30131/2017 dated 13.02.2017. However, the Department did not agree with this sanction of refund solely on the ground that the Original Authority has not examined the question of compliance of the Appellant to the principle of unjust enrichment as is required under the provisions of Sec.27(2)(a) & 28D of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) has, inter alia, held that the Original Authority has not examined the legal requirements i.e., Section 27(2)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. He also held that under Section 28D of the Customs Act, unless the contrary is proved by the claimant, it is deemed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s out of station and when they went to submit the CA Certificate, they came to know that Order was already passed in the subject case. 5. The learned DR, on the other hand, has reiterated the grounds taken by the Appellate Authority in the OIA and has also pointed out that in view of the provisions of Sec.28D, unless contrary is proved the Appellant would be deemed to have passed on the full incidence of such duty and that the principle of unjust enrichment is rightly invoked in the facts of the case. 6. Heard both the sides. 7. The short question for determination in the facts of the case is whether principle of unjust enrichment is applicable or otherwise and if so, whether Appellants have passed the bar or not. It is an admitted fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OIO No. 237/2017 dated 01.09.2017. Thus, it is not apparent whether the CA Certificate was submitted to concerned authority while passing Order dated 01.09.2017 in which he has however not discussed this issue at all. Therefore, considering the fact that Appellants tried to submit the CA Certificate to Commissioner (Appeals) at appellate stage, which could not be submitted due to delay of few days and the fact that there has not been any occasion for them to defend their claim of not having passed the incidence of duty, so as not to be hit by the principle of unjust enrichment before the Original Authority, I find much merit in the arguments advanced by the learned Advocate for the Appellant. They have adduced a CA Certificate in support of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
