Clubbing of clearances under exemption notification rejected for separate factories, with refund relief allowed subject to unjust enrichment.

Clearances from separate manufacturing units were held not liable to be clubbed for denial of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. because the appellant's factories were treated as distinct units on the basis of the Tribunal's earlier decision in its own case, applying the Supreme Court ratio. With the present facts found identical, the same interpretation of Explanation V was followed. The appellant was therefore entitled to the notification benefit and consequential refund relief, subject to the law on unjust enrichment.

---

---

Issues: Whether the clearances from the appellant's different manufacturing units were liable to be clubbed for denial of the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-C.E., and whether the appellant was entitled to refund with consequential relief.

Analysis: The dispute was covered by the Tribunal's earlier decision in the appellant's own case, which had applied the ratio of the Supreme Court decision and held that the appellant's various factories were to be treated as different units. On that basis, the clearances were not liable to be clubbed under Explanation V to Notification No. 175/86-C.E. The present facts were found to be identical, and the same view was followed. Relief was granted subject to the law relating to unjust enrichment.

Conclusion: The clubbing of clearances was not justified and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the notification and consequential refund relief, subject to unjust enrichment.

---