https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448775 The HC dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding a refund claim under Section 28D of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellate authority accepted certificates from a Chartered Accountant and Director confirming that goods imported under three Bills of Entry remained in use by the Dredging Corporation and the vessel had not been sold. The court held that unjust enrichment principles do not apply when goods remain in use and have not been disposed of, particularly for state undertakings. Following precedent from a SC decision in Mafatlal Industries, the court ruled that the bar of unjust enrichment would not apply to the refund claim. en-us Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Aug 2024 14:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448775 The HC dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding a refund claim under Section 28D of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellate authority accepted certificates from a Chartered Accountant and Director confirming that goods imported under three Bills of Entry remained in use by the Dredging Corporation and the vessel had not been sold. The court held that unjust enrichment principles do not apply when goods remain in use and have not been disposed of, particularly for state undertakings. Following precedent from a SC decision in Mafatlal Industries, the court ruled that the bar of unjust enrichment would not apply to the refund claim. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448775